Pandering To One’s Ego
I never knew that playing tennis could be such an ego trip for some people. In what was supposedly a social or recreational event, a handful allowed the ugly side of their character to surface by adopting double standards in applying the rules of the game Fortunately, such accounts are few and far in between but they are enough to get you under the skin.
- My opponent’s first serve did not clear the net and the ball rolled within the playing court. I returned his second serve and the ball collided with the ball from the first serve. He claimed a let. But if the situation had been reversed, he would say "That's your fault for not clearing the ball."
- I used to serve with two balls in hand as it was easier to launch the first ball with another ball beneath. During play, I discarded the second ball that I would normally had pocketed it. My tennis wear had no pockets then. My opponent objected and claimed his point. I do agree it was not appropriate of me but to me it was picky to cite disruption of his concentration. It was not like we're playing in a tournament. He was taking a social game far too seriously.
- I served what was apparently to me a fault and there wasn’t the anticipated call from the receiver. Instead, he returned serve. Naturally, I did not react to his return of my serve. It emerged that his tactic was to wait to see my reaction. If I chose to continue play, he would make his call. If I chose inaction, that would be a point I lost to him because he hadn't call. Or, a sublet variation of this tactic was to display a body language and a lackadaisical return of to suggest that my serve was out. and taking that as the cue, I did not play on. Thereupon, that cost me the loss of a point.
- My opponent attempted a drop shot and failed to clear the net. In rushing to the net in anticipation of that drop shot, my racquet touched the net. My opponent claimed he won a point.
- Just after volleying, my racquet made contact with the net. My opponent claimed his point, mind never that the ball had landed and was therefore no longer in play when the net contact was made.
- In playing doubles, one of my opponents and I were at the net. He occasionally faulted me for double hit or double bounce and called it his point. I disagreed with him what constitutes a double. A vague perception that the ball first makes contact with the beam of the racquet before the string bed does not make a double. Nor does playing by ear, as he maintained. No one has the skill to intentionally execute that at will!
- Before beginning serve, the onus is on the server to see that the receiver is ready. However, immediately following a first serve, a receiver has no excuse to "unready" himself for the second serve by turning sideway to avoid looking at the server and rehearse his swing.
- My opponent called my serve ‘out’ and then deemed it good. Why should be I penalized by having to serve again? If he misjudged what was good, I should get a point forthwith. Having to re-serve is adding insult to injury. Miscalls do not entail the caller to a "let".
- We all know that if a ball lands centrally on a line, it is indisputably good. What if the ball hits a little more away from the center towards the outside parameter of the line but nevertheless still touches the line? You will find almost every player exercising his right of call as "out".
- From the player's perspective, the point of ball contact with the racquet must always be from his side of the net and that it is perfectly legitimate for his racquet to cross the net plane thereafter. But what if, in his follow-through, the racquet touches the net AFTER the ball has crossed the net plane? We seem to regard the net as something of a taboo.
whoops.... so embarrassing!
posted by Victor Lai @ 10:43 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home