Displaying 101 - 150 of 582

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment
323June 12, 2022Tom

Disagree. The current rule as written is adequate. Yes, there are sometimes situations where a head ref and/or a tournament director makes a call contrary to a rule. They have that authority. I understand the frustration that players feels when this happens, but it is what it is, and I suspect the call is made "for the good of the tournament." Like when a player (yes, one of the pros), was late for his center-court gold medal match. 8 minutes ... 10 minutes ... 15 minutes ... There were 150 fans waiting to see the match. The TD allowed it. His call.

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.

40June 26, 2021Aimee

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

275July 11, 2022Diahann

Do not agree with this proposal. We have the option to wear eye protection. People would not be prevented from wearing a helmet if they choose as well. The referee has a primary responsibility to watch for foot faults at the NVZ. How would a referee know where someone got hit by the ball? Again this would put the referee in the position of having to ask the player and go with their response. This opens it up to people claiming they were hit 'just above' the shoulder so then they get a fault on the other team. This opens up the game to cheating.

If people are concerned with safety wear glasses and/or a helmet for protection. They can also wear a mouth guard for their teeth if they are so inclined. I do not see the benefit of faulting a player for mishitting a ball and accidentally hitting someone above the shoulders.

290June 11, 2022Bill

Do not change the rule! I also work with new players and explaining that all the lines are "in". Is relatively easy to explain and to understand. The NVZ line is in the NVZ. If it hits that line on the serve its a short serve. If your foot is on that line when you volly the ball it's a fault. The center line is in both service courts and you need to pay the ball. They get it!

372July 24, 2022Mike

Do not eliminate the lob on the 3rd shot or anytime. Shall we eliminate the overhead smash when two the opponents are both at the net for safety sake? Don’t make Pickleball complicated. The lob is a great shot if I can be successfully executed

389July 27, 2022Tim

Do not make this change. Under the scenario that was provided, we are allowing the person with the absolute worst view of the play to make the call.

369May 11, 2022Stewart

Do not wait until next year to outlaw the spin serve. Why ruin the remaining tournaments this year. This serve now dominates the game for those who have mastered it. Not very fun to spend the money to enter a tournament just to get knocked out by someone who uses a gimmick serve.

536July 10, 2022Mary

Do we want pickleball to be viewed as a game, with players required to keep track of 3 ever-changing numbers, or do we want pickleball viewed more as an athletic sport?

Moving in the direction of eliminating or reducing out of position/wrong server/wrong receiver faults would seem to push pickleball more into the "sports" camp, which I view as positive, especially for professional tournaments.

That said, from the referee perspective it seems having the referee call the score twice would not bode well for growing the ranks of referees. Perhaps being more generous with information when asked questions by players is the way to go.

As a player, I have a practice of saying the score, then bouncing the ball, once or twice, then hitting the serve. I have noticed my routine gives all players a moment to digest what I said and to question or adjust if necessary.

Would a rule change be feasible that requires the service ball not be hit until 3 seconds after the completion of the score has been announced? Perhaps the referee has his/her arm raised when saying the score, then dropped after 3 seconds, signaling when play can begin.

I am not proposing this as a rule change in a separate section because it is not clear to me whether the body of players of this game consider the gotcha faults of wrong server/wrong receiver/out of position a good thing or rather, something we should move away from. If it is something we want to move away from, perhaps a 3 second delay could be tried on a provisional basis.

273April 21, 2022Gary

Don't like rally scoring

367July 11, 2022Kevin

Eliminates too many indoor venues. However, any indoor tournaments should list ceiling heights in the tournament description so that players can make decisions as to whether they wish to play. I don't lob a whole lot and hate it when people lob a lot. Low ceilings would be a plus in my book.

367July 11, 2022Kevin

Eliminates too many indoor venues. However, any indoor tournaments should list ceiling heights in the tournament description so that players can make decisions as to whether they wish to play. I don't lob a whole lot and hate it when people lob a lot. Low ceilings would be a plus in my book.

293April 9, 2022judy

Everyone plays by the same rules, including seniors. No exceptions. (We already have wheelchair rules in the book.)
As a senior player this is an insult to our abilities.
Can you imagine the referee issues trying to call this.

524June 29, 2022Marsha

Exciting elements have been added to pickleball over the years by creative players seeking to play the game to their advantage. The Erne and backhand serve are examples of maneuvers that were initially challenged and frowned upon because they were confusing and difficult for players to return but are within the scope of the rules and have become part of everyday pickleball.

Imparting spin on the ball during the serve is no different. The spin serve and power serve were developed by high level tournament players (pros) vying for prize money as a means of having an advantage over their opponents. Other players like to emulate the pros, so some have worked to master their own spin serves. Receivers initially had difficulty returning such serves but over time have trained and become more successful at returning the aggressive serves.

In addition, the percentage of players using spin serves is minimal in comparison to the total number of pickleball players. The vast majority of players use non-aggressive serves to start the rally. Players who do not want to be subjected to aggressive serves have the option of not playing with players who use them.

The spin serve is not prohibited by the rules of the game that have been in place since their inception in 1965 and has been around for at least five years in the pro ranks. Consider what pickleball would be like if the Erne had been prohibited.

439June 19, 2022Tyler

Feels like a solution searching for a problem. What about step trackers? What about people wanting to track their heart rate?

If there is abuse of coaching during run of play, then penalize the behavior, but the mechanism for receiving messages is the same mechanism for so many other advantageous objectives live monitoring health, etc.

No objections to the earbuds/phones during competition play.

281June 12, 2022Stan

First this proposal contradicts 6.D.5. - Players should not question their opponents' call. Second, this has the potential to lead to intimidation and bullying by the players questioning the call. Arguments and unpleasantries could ensue. For the integrity of the game, let's keep the rule as it is currently written.

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.

371July 7, 2022Maria

For me this is simple:
1. Players need to be held accountable to know who the correct server/receive if, their score, and where they should be positioned based on their score.

275June 19, 2022Tyler

For tournament rules, referees could have the latitude for a technical foul for unsporting behavior with head targeting, however, for rec play, I agree with previous statements that it is the responsibility of the receiving player to manage their own body mechanics and protect themselves (including protective eyewear).

Like all sports, there is a degree of risk. Those that persistently increase risk or seek to win through unsporting behavior can be punished with group dynamics rather that legislating that behavior out. Governance for a rule like this is nearly impossible: what if I was on the court and the ball hit my head, how do we measure intention to hit head, etc. Too messy.

290April 10, 2022Darla

From a former ambassador who has taught beginner's clinics: All lines ARE in! Every single line is within the area it's defining so any ball hitting a line is "in" that area. This includes the NVZ line. The NVZ line is IN the kitchen, so it's a fault on the serve. That's exactly how I explain it to beginners. "All lines are in. This NVZ line also in -- it's in the NVZ. Since you have to *clear* the NVZ for the serve to be good, it would be a fault if the ball hits this line when you serve the ball." I've never had a single beginner not understand this or be confused by it. Now, if you're saying the following words to a beginner, yes, it would be confusing: "All lines are in, well except this one. For some stupid reason, it's out on the serve." That is not factual and is confusing.

23July 5, 2021Bill

From my point of view as a referee I like the rule as it is. I never had a "phantom let" before, but I feel the current rule is no problem and removes the opportunity for mischief (integrity and sportsmanship). I have refereed PPA and Regionals although not 500 matches. Note that both sides of the net play with the same net, temporary or permanent.

40June 21, 2021Melody

Giving a second serve opportunity will encourage more players to attempt serves that press the envelope on illegal verses legal motions, since they get a replay. There should be a distinct penalty for illegal serves and the player should not get a do over.

582July 7, 2022Maria

Good add from a rules perspective. Also agree with Beth.

536July 9, 2022Rick

Good morning!

As a pro player of 10 years, i strongly feel that a referee should be an advocate of correcting wrong positions/wrong servers without penalty to a player or team. This takes away the discomfort from 3 entities: The ref doesn't want to issue a "gotcha" violation, the team in violation doesn't want to lose a point that way and usually the team awarded a point doesn't feel good about getting a point that way. I've spoken to many of the Open and Senior pros who feel the same. Thanks for your consideration:)

485July 12, 2022Kevin

Haven't seen the Bill of Rights that gives a player the right to play on a standard referenced net system. If need be add language to the definition of net systems. Leave as is.

536July 9, 2022Shannon "Gunner"


I have been thinking and would like to make another comment about 4.D.3 and 4.D.3.a. This might not be viewed well, but it is just my opinion. I understand the intent behind 4.D.3 and 4.D.3.a with players getting into the correct position, and if there is a referee, the referee will move players into the right place. This is where USA Pickleball wants the game to go, and they want the referees to make sure everyone is in the correct position, play the points, and have it won by paddle play, not a receiver or server fault. I won't fight that because it will become the law of Pickleball. Hence, calling the score twice is something that I think the management wanted to use as a tool to ensure everyone is in the proper position before play begins so that the outcome will be about paddle play, not faults. I don't particularly appreciate calling the score twice because we put yet another item for the referees to do during the match. Unless we start paying $50,000 - 100,000 annually for refereeing, this is not a SECOND FULL-TIME JOB that referees want. They do it part-time for fun. USA Pickleball needs to remember this. Days are long, tiresome, and mentally straining, with calling score and using your voice 200 times has now become 400 times with the extra score calling. I believe you are trying to hide rule 4K, which isn't viewed well with this new rule of 4.D.3.

So, I make a motion to rewrite a rule that states this. After the rally ends, whether a point, second serve, or side out, say the complete score once after the ball is dead. Let the teams hear the score, sink in, and go to the correct position. When they are in the proper place, the referee points or motions to them, and then they serve the ball.
This will get rid of the 10 seconds to call the score, get rid of calling the score twice, get rid of rule 4K, which isn't popular, help with hearing impaired by pointing or gesturing to them, and appease the individuals that want the referee to put everyone in the correct positions before the ball is served. I understand something like this was intact before 2004 or 2005.

Recap; Delete rule 4.K, delete 10 seconds for serving, and delete calling the score twice (4.D.3). Call the complete score immediately after the rally, let the score sink in with the players, and then point to the serving team when they are ready to serve.

Thanks for your time

Pickleball player, tournament player, Certified referee, referee trainer, referee coordinator, and tournament director.

536July 16, 2022Linda

Hello!!! As a tournament player, I’ve had to learn the rules and abide by them. I don’t want a Ref to coach me into position or help me hit a backhand! All players should learn the rules.
As a Ref, I don’t want to coach or assist players into position or give the appearance of aiding one side or the other. I was taught not to give a player the ball for serving but rather to roll it onto the service side of net, to eliminate the “tell” of who was the correct server. Now the idea of Rule Change to orchestrate proper server or receiver positions is not dissimilar to the 1962 Twilight Zone episode “The Little People”. Referees become the giants moving the players around like pawns.

Calling score twice or a head nod for “go!”??? Ouch, baby.

If we take any responsibility or culpability away from players, we run the risk of becoming “helicopter officiants” and thus becoming a virtual reality and very active part of their game.

Give players more credit for knowing the rules themselves and slow
down on changing so much about a game that is so fun in it’s simplicity. Please?


63June 27, 2021Meri

Hmmm. Not sure i like this change. 2 servers each side is fun. This changes score calling, I like the current system.

268April 10, 2022judy


Not a good one.

By this is a player could not ask the partner what they saw.

369June 9, 2022Chuck

I agree completely with others regarding this proposed rule change. It completely changes the game to a serve orientated game as opposed to the serve being intented to just start the game.

369June 1, 2022Corne

I agree completely with this proposed rule change. It completely changes the game to a serve orientated game.

369May 11, 2022Stewart

I agree completely with this proposed rule change. The one-handed spin serve has been mastered by numerous ameture players, completely changing the nature of the game. Many or even most of these serves are unreturnable or at best weakly returned, so that the points are over within a couple shots. It is fast becoming a game of "whoever has the best spin serve wins". The game is not very much fun anymore. Please bring back Pickleball by outlawing this aberration of a shot.

369July 13, 2022Wes

I agree completely. The spin serve is a gimmick and does not emphasize any skill that translates to the rest of the game.

23June 27, 2021Bob

I agree from a safety perspective. Proper positioning on the court makes it extremely difficult to get to a serve that clips the net and barely lands in. Since let serves are obvious I don't see the false let serve call ever. Considering the wide age range of players i think replaying let serves should be reestablished

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.

281June 16, 2022Larry

I agree that clarification is needed regarding line calls. However, we seem to continually avoid a firm position that is framed perfectly in the Sportsmanship Guide. The concept of "Resolve any uncertainty in favor of your opponents." should be included in the actual rulebook. Regardless of the circumstances, if both doubles partners aren't able to confirm that a ball is out, it's in. Pickleball is a sport where integrity is prized and honesty is paramount. Currently, if I call a ball out and my partner can't make a call, we award the point to our opponents. Even when I play with multiple partners, I insist on this concept and I've never had a partner dispute it with me. Interestingly, we've even awarded points in this fashion only to have our opponents take a contradictory position later in the same game. Hence the need to allow a player to ask the other partner for their position after a call is made and "Resolve any uncertainty in favor of your opponents." Otherwise, the language in the Sportsmanship Guide lacks any real meaning.

521June 24, 2022Walt

I agree that clothing can be a distraction and can mask the ball which limits the amount of time an opponent has to react.

526June 24, 2022Walt

I agree that clothing can be a distraction and can mask the ball which limits the amount of time an opponent has to react.

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.

389June 19, 2022Tyler

I agree that some ambiguity exists on the two rules, however, I would propose that consideration be put forth for what constitutes the out-ball. In soccer/football, the ball is not considered out of play until the entirety of the ball is no longer in the field of play. The field of play is a vertical field of play, so the boundary lines extend vertically: if the edge of a ball is "touching" the virtual,vertical line, it is still in play. Players are not required to adjudicate whether the contact point is entirely off the field of play. Instead, you watch for whether space is visual between the edge of the ball and the line.

In a sport where the majority of players are making their own line calls, teaching players to watch for the space, rather than to speculate whether or not the ball touched the line or not is more defensible. While this would effectively expand the field of play by 1-inch due to the end of ball determining in vs. out, it is negligible to allow a better (albeit still imperfect) bright line test for in/out calls.

The amendment therefore, would be to 6.C.A. that the entirety of a ball must be outside the line to be an "out ball."

59June 25, 2021Bill

I agree that the drop serve should be full instated as a permanent rule. I do not agree that any changes should be made to the current rule concerning the drop serve. In all racquet sports the serve is a weapon and should not be restricted. In almost all tournaments you can see some players using the traditional serve in ways that could be considered questionable. In the quick service motion it is almost impossible (without slow motion replay) to decide if all the qualifications for a legal serve have been met. If any new change is made it might be in the best interest of the game to only allow the drop serve. Service questions automatically go away.

371July 13, 2022Margot

I agree that the question about being the correct receiver can be confusing to the player under certain conditions. There is really no reason for this question to be asked as it would be a server fault first if the server was wrong or out of position. I would rather be able to respond to whether the receiver was in the correct or incorrect position based on the score. So, I would like to see the question of "Am I the correct server?" removed.

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.

360June 11, 2022Marsha

I agree that the rules should address the criteria for replacing a degraded ball - player consensus.

369June 28, 2022YW

I agree that the spin serve should be banned from the game. It gives an advantage to the server that was not intended to be within the original spirit of Pickleball. I hear supporters of the spin server say to figure it out because you can learn to spot the spin direction imparted by the server's hand. It's an additional "skill" for us to learn in Pickleball, one that was not required before and intrinsic to the origins of the game.

Also, what about those of us who are senior with not-so-great eyesight, vision-challenged, if you will? It's not so easy for us to spot the spin from 44+ feet away, especially when it's done quickly.

367July 27, 2022Tim

I agree that there should be a minimum ceiling height for indoor tournament play but wonder how they determined that the height should be 39 ft. Whatever it is, the standard should be high enough to allow for high defensive lobs. Having said that, this rule should only apply to tournament play and most definitely not apply to all indoor facilities.

439July 6, 2022Beth

I agree that this change should not be implemented. How does a ref know if a watch is smart or smart enough? If a player is found to be receiving coaching via their watch it should be a fault -- that would include using the watch to know if the player is in the correct position to serve/receive.

367June 22, 2022Walt

I agree there should be a minimum ceiling height. Many indoor facilities have volleyball whose minimum height is 23'. Does volleyball have different ceiling height requirements? I would recommend changing the 39' to 23'. Even the covered courts at Pictona in Holly Hill FL are only 31' and more than adequate. Like the side and baseline setbacks, maybe there would be a minimum, recommended, and tournament/championship heights.

369May 22, 2022Mary Ann

I agree wholeheartedly. This is simply a trick serve and makes the game boring (except for the server). With games being short enough as it is, why make them shorter? With trick serves a game can be done in 5 minutes. Really? Is that what you want USAPA? Take a survey of the players who have made this sport grow (all the non-pros) so wildly and see what the consensus is.

513July 13, 2022Darla

I agree with Brien's assessment and thoughts. Please do not change the very nature of pickleball with this fundamental change. The change seems to often be directed at benefiting those who might do a lot of tournament play, and especially at pros who will be televised. So many MORE people play in neither of these situations and this would be a huge change that, I agree, could cause a lot of schism in our beloved sport.

I would ALSO ask that this issue be put to rest once and for all -- please when defending side-out scoring if/when making this decision this year, please state that side-out scoring is permanent and will not be changed in the future. Thank you.

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment