PDA

View Full Version : Are Foot Faults necessary, your call?


youizahoe
Sep 13th, 2009, 06:55 PM
I wonder, if foot faults even make sence. It does not make any difference for the opponent wether a player touches the line or not.

Please vote based on your own thoughts, loose from your hate for Serena and the verbal abuse at the end. And if you need to go on the biased tour, stay out thanks.

Yes or No and motivate.

youizahoe
Sep 13th, 2009, 06:58 PM
I think they aren't necessary, from own experience, I don't see any difference in my matches when a player does it or not.

Kenny
Sep 13th, 2009, 06:59 PM
I think the technology needs to be developed if they are going to enforce the rules. Place something there to remove the human element out of it...

gentenaire
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:00 PM
Unless a player is blatantly crossing the line, I see no reason to call foot faults.

Roookie
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:03 PM
no....but the rules are the rules :shrug:

Joana
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:03 PM
It's the same as an 1 mm out serve. It doesn't make a difference, but you have to draw the line somewhere.
Like I said in another thread, a foot fault is like any other call in tennis.

Berlin_Calling
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:05 PM
who determines what blatantly crossing a line is? that is completely subjective according to each line judge. that would bring MANY more problems than solutions.

Apoleb
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:07 PM
Yes. Don't step on the fucking line. Everyone knows this. Next.

They only need to put a challenge system for more fairness.

LoLex
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:08 PM
The rule is necessary but only for players who clearly cross the line and try to serve staying inside the court or for the players who are doing it constantly on the purpose. I don't think it ever happens on the pro level.

youizahoe
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:08 PM
The initial foot fault that began the fireworks was a terrible call. It was unconscionable. It cannot be made at the end of any match, let alone in the semifinals of the U.S. Open. This isn't because a foot fault is a ridiculous call at that juncture (even though it is). It's because it wasn't a foot fault. The replays show that Serena's foot was behind the line when she served. You could make the argument that it was close but not close enough to make the call.

-VSR-
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:11 PM
No. From experience playing tennis, it doesn't make a difference unless it's a huge margin (like on half of it). Touching the line even slightly isn't going to give you an advantage, most of the time you don't even think about it anyway. At least in my case, I don't think being a hair on the line is going to make a difference whether I hit an ace or a double fault.

Kind of off-topic, I believe a foot-fault should just be a 'let' do the serve over. It's not worth losing a point serve over, let the rallies do that for you.

TheBoiledEgg
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:12 PM
then the next thing you'll see then its only 1mm out......... its my point.

goldenlox
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:12 PM
The 2nd set was on serve 15-30.
That match was wide open when the foot fault was called.

Was it really a foot fault? Very close. That call made a big difference.

Noctis
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:13 PM
I think we need Hawkeye
That women was half asleep yesterday,

gmokb
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:13 PM
A stupid and useless rule that needs to be abolished.

Feyd
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:14 PM
Yeah, it is necessary.
If a player abuses the line with say 3mms and the serve ends up within 3mms of the service box, then the people will begin to question the validity of that serve.
You have to draw the line somewhere.

But I think a fault is a bit harsh penalty, it should be replaced with a let.

sammy01
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:16 PM
lol the rule is there for a reason, its not there to stop serena or be unfair, its there to be equal and fair. otherwise any player could walk to the service line on their side and serve. there has to be a line of which to serve behind and its the baseline, end of story.

RFSTB
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:19 PM
Personally I hate it. It's never obvious and annoying as hell, especially when called against my favorite players at a critical point. I swear these foot fault linespeople are the biggest party poopers. Sometimes I just want to bitch slap them silly! :lol:

At least put in a challenge system. I don't trust humans, even if they are trained professionals.

Uranium
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:19 PM
Unless a player is blatantly crossing the line, I see no reason to call foot faults.

I agree with this.

LoLex
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:21 PM
Okay. The rule is the rule. But there is also rule about taking only 20 seconds between points and we all know the reality is different. Very rarely player gets a warning for that.

youizahoe
Sep 13th, 2009, 07:22 PM
Actually it does not make a difference, in fact, you have more chance hitting it out than in. And I really don't think a foot fault is really made up by a reason. Its not like you gonna jump like over the service line and hit the serve from a meter away :rolleyes:

Touching the net for instance has no reason either, it's not like the net will fall over or the opponent will think you will run onto his side of the court and make the winner like that :rolleyes:.

miffedmax
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:01 PM
It really doesn't make such a big difference at the pro level,and if you're just touching the line. But at the junior level, yeah, some kids will use it to get a running start to do practically a jump serve and give themselves a huge advantage. And, as others have pointed out, you have to draw the line somewhere, literally.

Incidently, touching the line is only one part of the foot fault rule.

Lena's bangs.

TeamUla
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:15 PM
The rule is necessary but only for players who clearly cross the line and try to serve staying inside the court or for the players who are doing it constantly on the purpose. I don't think it ever happens on the pro level.

Believe me, there are such players on the challenger level. It is good then to have a foot-fault rule, really.

Foxy
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:19 PM
I agree with Sammy01, The rule is there for a reason and Serena is not the only person who got called for a foot fault.

The correct call was made and that's all Serena had to do is walk to the chair and ask if they could show a replay. But the line judge had to call a footfault if there was a foot fault.

And they are not gonna change the rules because Serena got mad and lost her temper and lost the match.

That would not be fair to Kimmy or the other women on the wta, and the men who got called for their foot faults during this tournament.

The foot fault call on 15-30 is no different than an opponent serving a double fault and losing a point. We witnessed players double faulting on the last point in the game and losing, and the same line judges had to call a fault.

No rules were broken for them and they shouldn't be broken for Serena because she and all of the other players know the rules of the game and the rules about conduct.

The correct call was made and SErena will just have to do like Maria, Elena, Ana, Kutzy, Venus, Jelena, Amelie and all the other players and move on to the next tournament.

manu32
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:20 PM
1/10 000 foot faults are "punished" and some players obviously cross the line frequently.....so???

Elisse
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:27 PM
Rules are rules...and that's one of the rules of the game.

Kim's_fan_4ever
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:28 PM
This rule is there for a reason.

Hurley
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:30 PM
"Don't step on the line" is the rule. Why have lines if they're going to be ignored. :speakles:

If any player wants the line to be moved an inch closer, he or she should petition Jesus or something, I dunno. :shrug:

cn ireland
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:41 PM
I have always believed that foot fault rule is stupid as it doesn't impact upon the serve. I can really understand player's frustrations when they are foot faulted.

-Sonic-
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:49 PM
Is the net really necessary?

RYNJ
Sep 13th, 2009, 08:49 PM
Footfaults give an advantage to serve and volley players. Since such tactic doesn't, rarely, is seen it should be modified. IMO, instead of it counting as a fault it should be called a "let" instead.

RJWCapriati
Sep 13th, 2009, 09:52 PM
I think they are definitely necessary for the game to be played fair. However, in the Williams situation.....my opinion is that was not a foot fault.

fammmmedspin
Sep 13th, 2009, 09:53 PM
Unless a player is blatantly crossing the line, I see no reason to call foot faults.

Practically you either cross the line or not. There's no where else to draw the line as "blatantly over the line" is an entirely subjective quantity and would lead to very call looking unfair to someone. its like the distance jumps - you either are on the plasticine or not and it gets a red flag or not.

Zweli
Sep 13th, 2009, 09:59 PM
They should bring hawkeye to monitor them

bobbynorwich
Sep 13th, 2009, 10:07 PM
Practically you either cross the line or not. There's no where else to draw the line as "blatantly over the line" is an entirely subjective quantity and would lead to very call looking unfair to someone. its like the distance jumps - you either are on the plasticine or not and it gets a red flag or not.

Exactly. It's the same issue with rules for losing points when player touches the net or ball touches clothing/body --- doesn't seem important regarding the play of the ball when only a "tiny" infraction, but where do you draw the line? It'd be worse if the rule wasn't either 'yes' or 'no' --- judges would be able to use their own discretion when the infraction was significant/important enough.

There must be a foot fault rule, otherwise players could put their feet wherever they pleased.

xan
Sep 14th, 2009, 12:14 AM
In REAL tennis - that 99% of people play, there is no-one, sitting on the baseline trying to see whether anyone's toe is 1mm over the baseline or not. Common sense prevails, and unless someone makes a clearly visible error, say an inch or more over the line, no one even notices. While there have to be rules that stop people stepping right in to court, we should not be calling foot-faults unless a significant and easy to spot error is made.

faboozadoo15
Sep 14th, 2009, 12:51 AM
It's the same as an 1 mm out serve. It doesn't make a difference, but you have to draw the line somewhere.
Like I said in another thread, a foot fault is like any other call in tennis.

I agree.
WTF are these people smoking?

I also find it SO bothersome when playing club level matches and someone's foot slides up on the line visibly.

faboozadoo15
Sep 14th, 2009, 12:58 AM
If you shoot a free-throw while standing on the line, what happens.

If a volleyball player jump serves, touching the line, what happens?

Honestly, people need to get a grip. The rules are there for a reason. It would be like playing all the balls that are less than half a centimeter out.

youizahoe
Sep 14th, 2009, 01:20 AM
faboozadoo I played more matches in my life than you. And I never had any issues with someone stepping on the line while serving, if you are really focused you don't even look at the feet, you look at the serve and focus right on the ball. So that's absolute BS you just posted.

If all players say a FF is really unnecessary, I do believe its time for a change :)

faboozadoo15
Sep 14th, 2009, 01:36 AM
faboozadoo I played more matches in my life than you. And I never had any issues with someone stepping on the line while serving, if you are really focused you don't even look at the feet, you look at the serve and focus right on the ball. So that's absolute BS you just posted.

If all players say a FF is really unnecessary, I do believe its time for a change :)

Speaking of BS.... Just come off it a bit, will you?
You're looking like a real moron here.

It's distracting because it's against the rules. And if you've played enough matches you might know the rules. If you know someone's breaking a rule, it's hard to not let it affect you. Maybe my vision (both literal and metaphorical) is better than yours. :lol:

Almost EVERY player would say the FF rule is good, so what are you even talking about?

AcesHigh
Sep 14th, 2009, 01:42 AM
:lol: Why do we have any rules at all?

The only reason this thread exists AT ALL is because it involved Serena.

When the rules affect Serena negatively, fans want the rules to be changed.
When the rankings affect Serena negatively, fans want the ranking system changed.
When the scheduling affects Serena negatively, fans want scheduling changed.

All WTA players by the same rules and how long have foot faults existed? Why change it now? It's nothing that gets in the way of matches.

disposablehero
Sep 14th, 2009, 01:44 AM
Um, what is the alternative? The closer a player gets to the net, the more of a weapon the serve is.
So, solutions if we don't like the long-standing current system? Only call it if the players entire foot is in front of the line? Thats not lax enforcement, that a new rule. Players would consistently serve with half of their foot in front of the line.
Do you know why players foot fault? Because serving a shorter distance is such a huge advantage that they always try to be 3 inches or less from the line when they serve. If players suddenly decided to serve from 6 inches back, foot faults would be extinct.

Donny
Sep 14th, 2009, 01:47 AM
Exactly. It's the same issue with rules for losing points when player touches the net or ball touches clothing/body --- doesn't seem important regarding the play of the ball when only a "tiny" infraction, but where do you draw the line? It'd be worse if the rule wasn't either 'yes' or 'no' --- judges would be able to use their own discretion when the infraction was significant/important enough.

There must be a foot fault rule, otherwise players could put their feet wherever they pleased.

If you shoot a free-throw while standing on the line, what happens.

If a volleyball player jump serves, touching the line, what happens?

Honestly, people need to get a grip. The rules are there for a reason. It would be like playing all the balls that are less than half a centimeter out.

:lol: Why do we have any rules at all?

The only reason this thread exists AT ALL is because it involved Serena.

When the rules affect Serena negatively, fans want the rules to be changed.
When the rankings affect Serena negatively, fans want the ranking system changed.
When the scheduling affects Serena negatively, fans want scheduling changed.

All WTA players by the same rules and how long have foot faults existed? Why change it now? It's nothing that gets in the way of matches.

_________
If this game turns into a foulfest and the refs screw us over like they did A&M in the loss to UCLA, all Jayhawk fans will have a right to be furious. Those officials better let the guys play and not make this game closer than it needs to be by calling 45-50 fouls. And that goes for this game or any game we play the rest of the way. The players and coaches work too hard to let the season end because some officiating crew (Hear that, Curtis Shaw?) thinks the game is more about them than it is the players. Just ask A&M.

IF the officials let them play on Friday night and call a "normal" type of college basketball game with pretty much even foul calls and free throw attempts on both sides, KU will win by at least 12-15.
http://blogs.cjonline.com/index.php?entry=6810

Somewhere in the middle of yesterday's 3-2 overtime loss in Saginaw, Kitchener Rangers captain Ben Shutron chatted with referees Scott Hoberg and Brent Holdsworth.

"Are we throwing a no-no tonight?" Shutron asked.

No-no as in no penalties.

That's exactly what the two Ontario Hockey League clubs threw before 2,827 at The Dow.

They played 61 minutes and 45 seconds of penalty-free hockey before one-time Ranger Jack Combs scored in overtime against old Saginaw Spirit teammate Parker Van Buskirk.
http://news.therecord.com/article/438396

Lou Campanelli once thought the same thing as Dick Bennett, Rob Evans and any number of Pac-10 men's basketball coaches who come into the conference from other parts of the country, watch how games are officiated out here, and wonder what's going on.

In 1985, Campanelli — now the Pac-10's coordinator of men's basketball officiating — took over at Cal after 13 years at James Madison, and his initial reaction was that the Pac-10 officials didn't let 'em play the way they did elsewhere in the country.

It's a common perception of the Pac-10, voiced again in recent days by Bennett, the coach at Washington State, and Evans, the coach at Arizona State.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2002182390_pacnotes17.html

Literally no other sport follows the rules literally. It'd make sports unplayable.

I've played on bball teams, faboozadoo. I've never been in a game were refs have called every touch foul they see. It'd be ridiculous to do so. Not even TENNIS follows foot fault rules literally. Do you think Venus is perfect with foot faults in every other event, then suddenly starts creeping over the line ten times a match when she got to Queens?

Volcana
Sep 14th, 2009, 01:53 AM
I wonder, if foot faults even make sence. It does not make any difference for the opponent wether a player touches the line or not.Think it through. Why not let the server just walk up to the net? There has to be SOME limit. What's the eaiest way to enforce a limit? A line. Hence foot faults.

faboozadoo15
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:00 AM
I've played on bball teams, faboozadoo. I've never been in a game were refs have called every touch foul they see. It'd be ridiculous to do so. Not even TENNIS follows foot fault rules literally. Do you think Venus is perfect with foot faults in every other event, then suddenly starts creeping over the line ten times a match when she got to Queens?

Why does everyone feel the need to post their bullshit sports resume in order to try to make a point?

I'm talking about free-throws, and I'm talking about shooting from standing on the line. If you haven't seen a player called for stepping on the foul line, you haven't watched enough. For that matter, why not give 3 pointers to players who step on the 3-pt line? :weirdo:

Donny
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:18 AM
Why does everyone feel the need to post their bullshit sports resume in order to try to make a point?

I'm talking about free-throws, and I'm talking about shooting from standing on the line. If you haven't seen a player called for stepping on the foul line, you haven't watched enough. For that matter, why not give 3 pointers to players who step on the 3-pt line? :weirdo:

This is ridiculous; tennis officials have already said that it's common to take the "let em play" approach with regard to foot faults, because it messes up the flow of the game. Even linespeople realize foot faults at crucial junctures of a match are BS.

Either you are super strict consistently, not just at one event a year, or you ease up. Fair, no?

AJZ.
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:25 AM
The rule is, you have to be behind the line. Crossing the line is a fault - the service is not done properly, and should not be counted. :shrug:
If you're going to remove foot faults, players can just do whatever they want. :/
It seems ridiculous at this level, but they are professionals. They know their game, they should follow all its rules, whether it be on Arthur Ashe court, or on the courts behind my house.

Donny
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:36 AM
Carol Cox, a veteran tennis official who evaluates linesmen and referees for the United States Tennis Association, said that there were two schools of thought on making a foot-fault call at a critical juncture in the match.

“One philosophy is that it is a rule, and you call it when you see it,” Cox said. “The second way of thinking is more in line with a good N.B.A. official: you don’t make a call that can decide a match unless it’s flagrant.”

John McEnroe had a similar view to the N.B.A. comparison when he was commenting on the CBS broadcast on Saturday night, “You can’t call that there.”
http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/the-thinking-behind-calling-foot-faults/

AcesHigh
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:40 AM
So let's just ignore the rules... that's fair to Kim, right?

FrOzon
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:42 AM
Think it through. Why not let the server just walk up to the net? There has to be SOME limit. What's the eaiest way to enforce a limit? A line. Hence foot faults.

That's it!

Donny
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:43 AM
So let's just ignore the rules... that's fair to Kim, right?

If applied equally to every player, it doesn't become a question of fairness.

What IS unfair is when footfaults are hardly called at all during the year, then the USO linespeople call ten footfaults a match, or called on second serves to give match points.

faboozadoo15
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:49 AM
If applied equally to every player, it doesn't become a question of fairness.

What IS unfair is when footfaults are hardly called at all during the year, then the USO linespeople call ten footfaults a match, or called on second serves to give match points.

:weirdo: It really isn't all that hard a thing to correct. That's why you rarely see more than one per match. You'd think Serena would have been warned by previous matches that she played or watched.

Donny
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:51 AM
:weirdo: It really isn't all that hard a thing to correct. That's why you rarely see more than one per match. You'd think Serena would have been warned by previous matches that she played or watched.

Selective enforcement of the rules is worse than consistently lax enforcement of the rules, imo.

Carol Cox, a veteran tennis official who evaluates linesmen and referees for the United States Tennis Association, said that there were two schools of thought on making a foot-fault call at a critical juncture in the match.

“One philosophy is that it is a rule, and you call it when you see it,” Cox said. “The second way of thinking is more in line with a good N.B.A. official: you don’t make a call that can decide a match unless it’s flagrant.”

John McEnroe had a similar view to the N.B.A. comparison when he was commenting on the CBS broadcast on Saturday night, “You can’t call that there.”
http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/the-thinking-behind-calling-foot-faults/

What do you think of that bolded part? Mind you, these are actual officials admitting to not calling foot faults at crucial points. Are they cheating or being unethical?

G1Player2
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:51 AM
:weirdo: It really isn't all that hard a thing to correct. That's why you rarely see more than one per match. You'd think Serena would have been warned by previous matches that she played or watched.

:rolleyes: If it's too close to call, and it certainly was, then she shouldn't have opened her mouth. Nobody, or any source for that matter, has confirmed that it was actually a foot fault, so what are you talking about?

G1Player2
Sep 14th, 2009, 02:53 AM
Selective enforcement of the rules is worse than consistently lax enforcement of the rules, imo.


http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/the-thinking-behind-calling-foot-faults/

What do you think of that bolded part? Mind you, these are actual officials admitting to not calling foot faults at crucial points. Are they cheating or being unethical?


:worship: :spit: I am glad you found that article Donny. So, these officials openly admit to enforcing this rule when they choose to and letting it go during pressure situations. These Serena hating trolls don't care about this though.

Привет
Sep 14th, 2009, 03:31 AM
Of course they are. If there isn't a rule restricting where a player serves from, the players could serve from inside the court, which would most definately be at the disadvantage of the receiver.

If we don't have a rule, than a player can run right up to the service line and serve from there. Of course that sounds ridiculous, but if there's no foot fault rule, than they're not breaking any rules by doing that.

You can't have a 'Unless it's really obvious' half arsed type rule. Rules are meant to be strict, that's why they're there.

Donny
Sep 14th, 2009, 04:02 AM
Of course they are. If there isn't a rule restricting where a player serves from, the players could serve from inside the court, which would most definately be at the disadvantage of the receiver.

If we don't have a rule, than a player can run right up to the service line and serve from there. Of course that sounds ridiculous, but if there's no foot fault rule, than they're not breaking any rules by doing that.

You can't have a 'Unless it's really obvious' half arsed type rule. Rules are meant to be strict, that's why they're there.

Read the article I posted further up the page. Plenty of refs already use that method when officiating matches.

Привет
Sep 14th, 2009, 04:16 AM
Read the article I posted further up the page. Plenty of refs already use that method when officiating matches.

Whether the officials are penalising players when they should is an entirely different matter.

This thread asked whether the foot fault ruling should exist, and yes, it should.