This is Ken S., Chair of the USAP Rules Committee. Nice job on explaining those rule changes!! ... uhh, except for #4. It is not required that both partners have to have seen the fault. If you saw it and your partner did not see it, you can call the fault. The rule says "if there is a disagreement " about the fault call, it's a replay. Meaning if your team (either or both players) calls the fault and their team (either or both players) disagrees, it's a replay. Of course, if your partner DID see it and disagrees with your fault call, then it goes in favor of your opponent and you'll have lost the rally for stopping play.
@@JoJo-Campeon That's definitely a big issue in rec play or whenever there is no referee. NVZ foot faults can happen A LOT without a referee because players are watching the ball and are rarely watching their opponent's or their own feet. Bottom line is you can't and shouldn't call a fault that you don't see. You can't and shouldn't agree or disagree with your partner or your opponents if you did not see it.
@ I see foot faults on both sides of the court. (Our and opponents) I’ve been calling faults on opponents, my partner and myself when on it during a volley.
#4 is absolutely wrong! Please remove this video and correct that. If you don't, this confusion will confound players for many months! The teammates do NOT both have to agree that their opponent committed an NVZ fault in order to call it. Please fix this!
I understand the volley as when you hit a high shot and you know the player is going to hit down at your feet, your paddle is usually touching the ground. Now you can lunge forward to pick it up instead of trying to take the ultra-short hop. The paddle serve may have been put in for people with one arm. That's how I've seen a woman serve anyway as she has no part of the missing arm, it's just shoulder. What's funny is we sometimes ask the 'spectator' which is really a player waiting for a game to finish and it's their turn, if a close ball was in or out. When I'm playing with a new partner I always tell them when I'm focusing on hitting ball, many times I don't really see if its out or in so I ask them to make the out call if that what it is. BTW, to me, it's a social game, so I just go what is called even if I know it to be wrong. If I have to argue or stress out I'll find another group to play with or I just don't have to play, it really isn't important. Thanks for the video.
It used to be “shall” not call now it is “will” not call (or something like this. The rule existed before but has been clarified with more definitive wording.
#1 Yes, as long as nothing, neither you nor your paddle, is touching the NVZ when you strike the ball. #5 To decide if you are going to it in or out? No, no, never.
Let's take the most common scenario. Player A commits a kitchen violation that he is unaware of making and his own partner B does not see it happen either. Player C on the other team sees the violation. His partner D either saw the violation too or did not see anything. In this case Player C's team will assert that a kitchen violation occurred (if D didn't see it, then their team's opinion is based on what C saw). Player A's team can either agree that a violation occurred (basically trusting the integrity of C's team) and lose the rally, or they can disagree that a violation occurred (even though they weren't looking at player A's feet at the time). In the event of a disagreement, a replay would occur.
@@jimh.4027a replay would occur if they disagree with the fault called? This would open the door for a bunch of misused fault calls. I think the rule states that if the teams disagree then the fault is deemed to have not happen and the point is over/lost?
This is Ken S., Chair of the USAP Rules Committee. Nice job on explaining those rule changes!! ... uhh, except for #4. It is not required that both partners have to have seen the fault. If you saw it and your partner did not see it, you can call the fault. The rule says "if there is a disagreement " about the fault call, it's a replay. Meaning if your team (either or both players) calls the fault and their team (either or both players) disagrees, it's a replay. Of course, if your partner DID see it and disagrees with your fault call, then it goes in favor of your opponent and you'll have lost the rally for stopping play.
Sorry, I tried to underline some words and they didn't show. Meant to say "if there is disagreement BETWEEN TEAMS" about the fault call.
Thank you Ken. I came here to say what you said.
@@kenschoonover9395 not all opponents look at their own feet nor their partner’s feet.. what then?
@@JoJo-Campeon That's definitely a big issue in rec play or whenever there is no referee. NVZ foot faults can happen A LOT without a referee because players are watching the ball and are rarely watching their opponent's or their own feet. Bottom line is you can't and shouldn't call a fault that you don't see. You can't and shouldn't agree or disagree with your partner or your opponents if you did not see it.
@ I see foot faults on both sides of the court. (Our and opponents) I’ve been calling faults on opponents, my partner and myself when on it during a volley.
#4 is absolutely wrong! Please remove this video and correct that. If you don't, this confusion will confound players for many months!
The teammates do NOT both have to agree that their opponent committed an NVZ fault in order to call it. Please fix this!
I agree. I think this video needs to be fixed or it will create all kinds of confusion out there.
Yes the arguments are going to start here! 😅
Wait what’s stopping me from calling a line fault on any close play?
I understand the volley as when you hit a high shot and you know the player is going to hit down at your feet, your paddle is usually touching the ground. Now you can lunge forward to pick it up instead of trying to take the ultra-short hop. The paddle serve may have been put in for people with one arm. That's how I've seen a woman serve anyway as she has no part of the missing arm, it's just shoulder. What's funny is we sometimes ask the 'spectator' which is really a player waiting for a game to finish and it's their turn, if a close ball was in or out. When I'm playing with a new partner I always tell them when I'm focusing on hitting ball, many times I don't really see if its out or in so I ask them to make the out call if that what it is. BTW, to me, it's a social game, so I just go what is called even if I know it to be wrong. If I have to argue or stress out I'll find another group to play with or I just don't have to play, it really isn't important. Thanks for the video.
Delete this video immediately! Dead wrong info at 3:20.
Is Ariel #5 new? I thought it always said that the call has to be made by the players on the court (and not spectators). Am I missing something?
It used to be “shall” not call now it is “will” not call (or something like this. The rule existed before but has been clarified with more definitive wording.
Both this video AND the linked website need to be updated and improved - both are way more complicated (non straight forward) than it needs to be.
#1 - Can you use your paddle touching the kitchen to balance yourself BEFORE you hit a volley?
#5 - Can you ask a spectator if a ball was in or out?
#1 Yes, as long as nothing, neither you nor your paddle, is touching the NVZ when you strike the ball.
#5 To decide if you are going to it in or out? No, no, never.
Can you jump from the kitchen, hit the volley, then landed outside the kitchen?
@@zengzijian no.
@@zengzijianno because both feet must be established outside the NVZ at the time of contact
@@jimh.4027 with the new rule, I believe it is legal.
So it is legal to toss the ball?
yes you always could the no toss rule was experimental for ppa pros for just a few tournaments
How to fight against Rule 4? Not all opponents look at their own feet nor their partner’s.. what then?
Let's take the most common scenario. Player A commits a kitchen violation that he is unaware of making and his own partner B does not see it happen either. Player C on the other team sees the violation. His partner D either saw the violation too or did not see anything. In this case Player C's team will assert that a kitchen violation occurred (if D didn't see it, then their team's opinion is based on what C saw). Player A's team can either agree that a violation occurred (basically trusting the integrity of C's team) and lose the rally, or they can disagree that a violation occurred (even though they weren't looking at player A's feet at the time). In the event of a disagreement, a replay would occur.
@@jimh.4027a replay would occur if they disagree with the fault called? This would open the door for a bunch of misused fault calls. I think the rule states that if the teams disagree then the fault is deemed to have not happen and the point is over/lost?
they have the #4 rule wrong
#4 is wrong get rid of this video before the mis information spreads