Displaying 51 - 100 of 139

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment
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.

83June 25, 2021Diane

I agree with the observation is that the rule has failed at making line calls better, and has on the contrary made line calls worse, and that the rulebook and the game are better off without this rule.

It essentially requires that players in some situations to call balls as OUT that they know for a fact are IN. For example, a player at the sideline should be within the rules in calling a ball OUT if the middle of the ball lies outside the line even if even if the edge of the ball obscures the gap. This is often a better view than their crosscourt partner. Requiring "a visible gap" invites argument, lies, and unsportsmanlike conduct.

But I disagree with the comment that there is any meaningful distinction between "the ball is in" and "I as an observer cannot call the ball out." If the observer cannot see it well enough to call it out, then they must defer the call to a player who has a better view, and if no one can see it well enough, then the ball is IN.

63June 25, 2021Sam

I believe clarification is needed about whether service switches to the other team member each time a team gains possession of the ball for serving or if one team member continues to serve for the entire game. Also, whether service during a possession always starts from the right side of the court or starts from whichever side the designated server is currently on.

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".

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


103June 25, 2021Walt

Bouncing the ball to serve is an insult to our wonderful game. I can’t imagine who would suggest such a rule. This is not little league baseball and is embarrassing for me to even watch. We have a player with only one arm. The only way he can serve is by dropping the ball. This is the only time dropping the ball on a serve should be allowed.

62June 25, 2021Bill

I had also submitted a change on this same issue (and it was flagged as a duplicate of this item). I recommend changing it to the point that the referee or any player leaves the court. At the end of a match, it takes a bit of time for the referee to gather the ball, mark the score sheet properly and have one of the winners initial the recorded scores. This amount of time is typically longer that the time between rallies during normal play. If someone wishes to challenge an incorrect player or position (or appeal an "out" call), this should be done promptly. It is also very difficult to call players back to a court once they have left they have left.

83June 25, 2021Nick

Unless I am missing something, rule 6.D.7 does not require an out call at any time.
It does require an in call unless you can clearly see a space between the ball and the line.

86June 25, 2021Nick

This proposal creates too much interpretation as to whether or not the opponents moved far enough out of the way.
The situation covered is a fairly infrequent occurrence. I do not think it is needed.

23June 25, 2021Bob

I concur. The removal of let serves creates an inherrant safety issue, especially for older players.

103June 26, 2021Martin

I agree with resuming 0-0- start as the opening score..

I favor retaining the drop serve. It has helped some of my students and allows for some variations in the serve..

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.

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.

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.

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!

8June 26, 2021Bill

Losing a point (or adding one point to the opponent) is a strong deterrent to bad behavior. Keep it as it is.

16June 26, 2021Bill

Changing ends too often only causes more delay in tournaments. It also creates more confusion for players to line up in their correct positions.

26June 26, 2021Bill

With the exception of medically necessary hearing aids, I see no reason that players should be allowed to wear earbuds. How would you know if the person was receiving constant coaching via cell phone?

40June 26, 2021Bill

Disagree. Most players (in tournaments) know how to serve.

52June 26, 2021Bill

Referees need to keep the game moving. There have been many times that I've called the 15-second warning and one or more players are slow in responding. Nothing gets them moving like seeing the referee's hand counting out the seconds.

63June 26, 2021Bill

The proposal is for a radical change to the sport. Perhaps a better approach would be to start a new sport (with a different name) using the proposed changes and see if the community likes the new sport.

77June 26, 2021Bill

As a referee, I do not want the responsibility for determining if a medical time-out should be granted. I've had no medical training. I don't want to be in a position to determine if an ambulance is needed. Leave the medical decisions to the trained medical personnel.

94June 26, 2021Bill

I agree with this. However, I would add that if the server changes sides or gives the ball to their teammate, then the receiver should be allowed time to reposition properly (i.e. no "trick serves"). Asking the ref a question has become a common way to delay the serve. If someone is slow to returning to their position at the 15 second warning, they often ask the ref "Correct Server?" or "Correct Side?" just to reset the 10 second count and gain more time.

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.

103June 27, 2021Bo

Please DROP the DROP serve. It gives some spinners an advantage, but we really aren't after aces like Tennis

52June 27, 2021Tim

I’m a Level 2 referee. I would leave time outs at 60 seconds total but increase the notice to 20 seconds from the current 15 seconds to give players more time to know they must return to the court to resume play.

112June 27, 2021Tim

I think this proposed change has some merit. I’m also a referee and it would make our jobs a little easier. Starting servers on each team would still wear the server bands (as the #1 server throughout the game) and keeping track of correct player positions would still be necessary for refs and players. But, it would certainly make determining who is the correct server easier for all concerned.

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 27, 2021Robert

This rule change should be adapted in the spirit of fair play, sportsmanship, and safety

174June 27, 2021Robert

I do not like this proposed rule change as I feel it would give too much advantage to the team which serves 1st

109June 27, 2021Robert

I totally agree that the underhand serve is commonly violated to gain speed, lower trajectory, and increase ball spin. I also agree that the hip vs waist change might help. However I feel that the main violation is that the underhand motion requirement is the the most violated principal. Most servers are using a side arm motion and bringing the paddle across the body during the follow through instead of maintaining the specified underhand motion. I believe that the follow through should continue a upward motion after the initial contact with the ball

63June 27, 2021Robert

I agree with this proposal 100%. Side out scoring is the most confusing rule in pickleball. Rally point scoring is simpler and more fair. Why shouldn't whichever team wins s rally get a point. Let's follow the example of volleyball and badminton and adopt rally scoring.

25June 27, 2021Robert

I agree with this proposal 100%. As a senior, 71 yrs, I cannot physically cover the entire court to play a singles game on a doubles size court. Living in a rural area, I find it nearly impossible to find a doubles partner. Therefore the only type of tournament that I have been able to participate in are scrambles where I don't have to have my own partner. Please adopt this rule, at least in senior divisions, so I can play in more tournaments

97June 28, 2021Vaunette

Upon retirement of a match, points that were scored should stand. For example, if the game score was 8-6 once a individual/team retires the score should NOT suddenly become 11-0.

20June 28, 2021Tom

Suggestion to leave drop serve BUT have it follow ALL OTHER RULES for serving ..
ALL OTHER SERVICE RULES APPLY including 4.A.3, 4.A.4 & 4.A.5

One of the great parts of pickleball is that the rules encourage long rally’s between the players. A key component of this is the service rules in effect prior to 2021. In essence the server was unable to dominate a point solely with their serve. Combined with the two bounce rule and the No Volley Zone rules, this makes pickleball a game of shot exchanges and shot positioning rather than of power. The 2021 provisional rule allowed a power serve to suddenly become a part of the game and threatens to create a “serve and volley” environment.
A second major part of the joy of pickleball is that the rules are such that there is not a great advantage provided naturally to the stronger male player. Mixed gender, and mixed generational play is lots of fun and I have played in all sorts of gender and age combinations without feeling that oh rats there is a youngster or a women on my team, now we are in going to get overwhelmed by the men on the other side… the service rules are a significant part of that joy and if one allows drop serves to have all sorts of spins and power moves that are not available with the service rules prior to 2021, then power and gender and age become greater factors hurting the game.
A third aspect to the pickleball rules prior to 2021 was that the serving team is at a slight disadvantage in that they cannot over power their opponent with their serve AND they have to wait for the return to bounce, allowing the return team to take the net. At the same time, the serving team is the only one to score a point toward victory, thus points have special value as to win a point, you have to overcome a disadvantage. This is unique to pickleball and is a great part of the game.
Simplicity. I teach beginning pickleball all the time. When I get to teaching how to serve, you explain the three rules (below belly button, upward motion, below the wrist) and then you have to say, but then there is also this other way and anything goes??? that’s nuts.
I agree that for some players, especially beginners, it is easier to serve off the bounce, so let a drop serve be allowed but DO NOT allow them to hit the serve any way they want, keep it low to high, below the belly button and below the wrist.

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.

94July 2, 2021Paul

The problem with the current rule is that the 10 second clock automatically runs, and that encourages "quick serving" and unsportsmanlike conduct.

94July 2, 2021Paul

The problem with the current rule is that it encourages "quick serving" and unsportsmanlike conduct. Recently at the Boise Regional (at game point, 10-7), the referee called the score, calling it as 10-7-1. We believed it was 10-7-2. I immediately placed my hand in the air and made eye contact with the referee and began inquiring about whether the server was a 1 or 2. The opposing team, realizing that my hand was in the air and that I was completely unprepared, immediately "quick served" me and won the point as the ball bounced through my side of the court. The referee said that once the score was called, I could not raise my hand. I asked about whether it was good sportsmanship to "quick serve" an obviously unprepared opponent, and he said that was a different issue. I believe that the rule should be changed to allow a good faith inquiry about what the score is after it is called and that the 10 second clock should be "tolled" or stopped while that inquiry is sorted out. The rules should not encourage "quick serving", which in any other sport would be viewed as bad sportsmanship -- not to mention, not particularly good viewing for spectators.

A similar problem exists coming out of the time out. The rule as currently written seemingly requires the referee to call that score 60 seconds after the time out is called - even if the players are unprepared. And then the serving team can again "quick serve" the opposition, even if they are unprepared. Most referees use common sense and don't call the score if one team is unprepared at 60 seconds. But the rule as written seems to cut off that discretion from the referee. That rule should be revised as well to try to prevent "quick serving" - if necessary a referee should first give a warning rather than call the score and permit a quick serve.

20July 3, 2021Darla

I previously submitted a drop serve rule change suggestion, but I do like this option better. With both serves, traditional and drop, require nothing other than hitting the ball below the waist and an upward arc. Those would be the only two things a ref would need to watch for; the same two things for both serves. I can only imagine this would be much easier for the ref, without changing really anything about the serves themselves. Good thoughts, this.

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.

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment