Grunts, Groans, Gamesmanship and Grandstanding - The Hindrance Rule

I frowned. I cringed. I found ear plugs. I finally turned off the volume. As Maria Sharapova and Victoria Azarenka hit the cover off the ball, the grunts and the exhalations became louder and more vociferous. I know that the powers that be in the television production trailer could turn down the on-court microphones. But that's not the point.

The point is that, in fact, both Maria and Victoria, are in violation of the Rules of Tennis. Both grunts on each stroke they took were long after their point of contact and therefore are a "hindrance" to the opposing player. The opposing player has the right to play the ball as it approaches without any interference from the other side of the net. A hindrance could be a hat falling off, or a doubles partner hitting a short lob and saying "back, back" to her partner... or a moan or grunt as we saw yesterday.

Before I go into the particulars concerning the semi-final, here is last year's final in which Serena Williams was penalized and lost a game due to an intentional hindrance.



This was a clear intentional hindrance with a shout out prior to Sam Stosur hitting (in this case missing) the shot.

Here is a clip from yesterday's match. You will note that both Sharapova's and Azarenka's grunts are heard long after the ball has crossed the net and are in fact tailing off just as the opponent hits the ball - just like in the Williams/Stosur match above.



Clearly, the grunts are a hindrance just as Serena's outburst prior to Sam's touching the ball. However, the interesting point to be made is whether the grunts are an "intentional hindrance". By the rules of tennis, there is no question. They are. And in fact, a point penalty should be awarded for each occurrence. Rule 26 reads:

If a player is hindered in playing the point by a deliberate act of the opponent(s), the

player shall win the point.

However, the point shall be replayed if a player is hindered in playing the point by

either an unintentional act of the opponent(s), or something outside the player’s own

control (not including a permanent fixture).

In fact, I would argue as a former ATP Tour chair umpire, that the grunts and noises are a deliberate act and an intentional hindrance - if not only for the fact that the volume of grunts goes up on winners and is lower on run-of-the-mill shots. We saw clips yesterday during the match of Maria Sharapova practicing - not a grunt to be found throughout the clip. Therefore, the grunts are in fact not something done unconsciously, but done with an intent to prove a point.

But the second half of the rule is what really should force the chair umpire into action and if I were in the chair, I would look at the second part of the rule to make this decision - "something outside the player's own control." Grunting, or the power to abstain from grunting, are clearly within the player's control to allow the opponent to hit without a hindrance. Therefore, these moans, groans and grunts are an intentional hindrance.

Needless to say the tennis was superlative. But, the gamesmanship was not. And it is gamesmanship, which is what the Rules of Tennis, at their core, try to uphold. I believe that the ATP and ITF should enforce Rule 26 as written and penalize the players according to the code. It would allow me, if nothing else, to enjoy the tennis without ear plugs.