scene on the court
Occasional Observations from a Pickleball Curmudgeon
By Craig Laughlin
‘ Replay !’
Friends ask if I worry about running out of
topics to grouse about in my column . “ Not for a while ,” is my standard reply , especially as long as our USA Pickleball rulebook leaves open so many opportunities for on-court disputes — disputes that , to my way of thinking , could and should be avoided with clearer rules .
Otto von Bismarck once said , “ Laws are like sausages . It ’ s better not to see them being made .” I suggest that the same caveat applies to rule making , to which I would add , “ Rules are like recipes . It takes a long time to get them right .”
Having taught refereeing for USA Volleyball for nearly 20 years , I had the chance to see the rule-making process for that sport up close and personal . Every year the powersthat-be would try to cover all their rule-making bases , only to find the next year that there was more work to be done .
As young a sport as pickleball is , I see busy years ahead for our USA Pickleball Rules Committee .
In my very first column , I complained about a player who thought his team was entitled to a do-over because he had called “ Ball on !” as his partner ’ s shot was sailing out of bounds . The partner , when asked , said the errant ball had not affected him . Nevertheless , both opponents insisted that a replay was required .
I had the exact same scenario play out again just a few days ago . The player who hit the ball out , as in the first instance , affirmed that he was unaffected by the errant ball . In fact , he never even saw it . This time , however , the player who called “ Ball on !” explained that , because she had made the call before her partner ’ s ball landed , the rally was over at that moment , and a replay was required .
When I heard last year there was going to be a new rulebook for 2020 , I hoped this kind of nonsense would be addressed , but it wasn ’ t . So , here ’ s what we have now : “ 3 . A . 16 Hinder – Any element or occurrence outside of the player ’ s control that adversely impacts play . Examples include , but are not limited to , balls , flying insects , foreign material , players or officials from an adjacent court that , in the opinion of the referee , impacted a player ’ s ability to make a play on the ball .”
And , “ 8 . C . A hinder called by the referee or player will result in a deadball . The referee will determine if the hinder called by the player was valid . A valid hinder will result in a replay .” “ Any element or occurrence …”? Wow , that narrows it down ! A few words of guidance as to what constitutes a “ valid ” hinder would help , but there are none . Even in the absence of such guidance , however , shouldn ’ t it at least be stated that only a player playing , or in position to play , a ball — and who feels he or she was
“ adversely impacted ” by the hindering element or occurrence ( not that person ’ s partner )— can call a valid hinder ?
Seems obvious to me , but the need to state the obvious is a part of what apparently keeps rule makers busy year after year , or so I hope ! •