scene on the court
Occasional Observations from a Pickleball Curmudgeon
By Craig Laughlin
Spotlight on Sportsmanship
Shortly after publication of a recent column in which I grumbled about a couple of rule changes , I received an email from Mark Peifer , Director of Officiating for USA Pickleball and Chairman of the USA Pickleball Rules Committee .
Mark had noticed my frequent grumbling over what I perceived to be unsportsmanlike conduct and asked if I ’ d be willing to join a committee tasked with codifying and encouraging behaviors of good pickleball sportsmanship . I accepted , and a committee of 12 ( including four Ambassadors , five District Ambassadors , and one Curmudgeon ) was quickly assembled under the chairmanship of Dick Osman , Certified Referee and District Ambassador . The committee ’ s “ USA Pickleball Sportsmanship Guide ” is nearing completion . Look for the guide in an upcoming issue of Pickleball Magazine .
Mark and I also engaged in a lively conversation about my objections to the new line calling guidance ( i . e ., that you must see a space between the ball and the line in order to call it “ out ”), which , I had complained , requires players to call balls “ in ” even when they are certain they are out . Although Mark agreed that humans have the tools — depth perception , and sufficient brainpower — necessary to determine whether we can be certain of a line call ( irrespective of whether we see a space ), he pointed out that requiring a visible space before calling a ball “ out ” minimizes the Pickleball Uncertainty Principle , whereby two people with exactly the same view of a ball will disagree on how much of the ball was overlapping the line .
“ It ’ s much harder to disagree on whether space was visible or not ,” Mark says . Point taken , but if everyone could be confident their opponents were always giving them the benefit of the doubt , the guidance would be unnecessary , which brought us back to the topic of sportsmanship .
Mark described refereeing a match in which Kyle Yates played a ball that was at least 4 inches out . When later asked why , Kyle replied , “ I couldn ’ t see the line as it was blocked by the ball , so I had to assume it was in , even though it was probably out .” According to Mark , there ’ s been a subtle shift to this standard of line calling at the pro level because it minimizes arguments and the need to appeal line calls .
“ If they can ’ t see a space , then they play on ,” he explains , “ because that ’ s what giving one ’ s opponents the benefit of the doubt is all about — and they know they ’ ll get the same treatment in return .” Well and good , but then why not adopt soccer ’ s standard of line calling ( by which balls that overlap the line are in , irrespective of the point of contact ) so that more of the balls we are compelled to call “ in ” actually are ?
While I still don ’ t care for the new guidance , I will follow it until such time as enough of us demonstrate more concern for preserving our integrity than for winning a game , conspicuously giving our opponents the benefit of the doubt so that the guidance can go away . •