VIDEO LIBRARY

Learn More Decisions With WSO

Practise your refereeing knowledge with the calls below! 

Rule: 8.6.4
  • Middle, Right
  • Easy
No Let
There was interference, but it did not prevent the striker from seeing and getting to the ball to make a good return, this is minimal interference and a no let is allowed.
Rule: 8.11.1
  • Back, Center
  • Medium
Stroke
This can be considered within two of the Rules.9.9.3 Where there has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply and the striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.8.11.1 There was interference and the ball would have hit the non-striker on a direct path to the front wall, a stroke is awarded to the striker, unless the striker had turned or was making a further attempt, in which case a let is allowed. It is important to consider that the player in maroon was ready to strike the ball in time.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Left
  • Hard
Yes Let
The player in white hits a drive to the back corner and could do more to clear better.The player in black could do more to move up and round but moves into the player in white and holds him in using the arm.Both players have not quite got the situation correct.Yes let is the correct decision.There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Back, Center
  • Medium
Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the strikerJust enough interference to stop the player in blue from being able to hit the shot, Stroke is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Right
  • Easy
Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Middle, Left
  • Easy
Stroke
The player in yellow hits a volley that he cannot clear because of where it lands. The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference; a stroke to the striker is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Middle, Left
  • Easy
Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interferenceThe striker could not swing as the follow through would have hit the non-striker.
Rule: 8.6.1
  • Middle, Right
  • Medium
No Let
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let is allowed.At this level in the professional game, a player needs to play the shot. At beginner or club level, you would want them to stop and ask for a let.
Rule: 8.10.1
  • Back, Center
  • Medium
No Let
If the striker caused the interference by using an excessive swing, no let is allowed. The striker in blue exaggerated the swing. Looking at the shoulders and how they turn is a great clue.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Centre / Interference / Medium / Yes Let
There was interference and the striker would have been able to make a good return. The opponent was making every effort to clear, a let is a allowed. When the striker can hit the ball there is room to play. The opponent holds position and stays out of the way. The strikers swing would not have come round enough to prevent the swing. Let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Medium / Middle, Left / Reasonable fear of injury / Yes Let
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent and there was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed.The ball is in a position where a professional player can hit straight or cross court. It is on the backhand side which makes it harder for the player in grey to get the ball cross court as the ball is quite far back in the swing. There is a risk of the follow through involved for the opponent. Yes let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.9.1
  • Affected Swing / Back, Centre / Hard / Yes Let
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowedThe player in blue prepares her swing and encounters interference with the player in pink who is recovering to a central position. There is a significant distance from the interference to where the ball is, the player in blue would have made a good return, therefore a yes let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.9.3
  • Medium / Middle, Left / Reasonable fear of injury / Yes Let
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent. There was also interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, so a let is allowed.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Interference / Medium / Middle, Right / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed
Rule: 8.9.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Shaping / Yes Let
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowed.The player in grey shapes to hit the ball. The opponent is in the way but the ball is moving away from both players. There is enough interference to warrant a yes let.
Rule: 8.6.4
  • Medium / Middle, Left / Minimal interference / No Let
There was interference, but it did not prevent the striker from seeing and getting to the ball to make a good return, this is minimal interference and no let is allowed.Although the player in black encounters contact, it isn’t sufficient to warrant a let, and the player needs to continue and look to play the ball.
Rule: 8.6.2
  • Front, Right / Medium / No Let / Winning return
There was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return, no let is allowed.Winning shot from the player in black.
Rule: 8.8.2
  • Front, Right / Hard / Must play the ball / No Let
The striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball and then requested a let for interference, no let is allowed.The initial step is the important one, the player in white took the first step towards the opponent. No Let is a good strong decision, with good explanation given.
Rule: 8.8.2
  • Easy / Front, Left / Indirect Path / No Let
The striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball and then requested a let for interference, no let is allowed.The player in white/black moved towards the opponent and not the ball.
Rule: 8.8.1
  • Back, Left / Medium / Must play the ball / No Let
There was interference but the striker did not make every effort to get to and play the ball, no let is allowed.The player in pink was wrong footed and corrected, and then encountered the interference. There was space to get through to the ball and the striker really needed to show more urgency to go and play the ball.
Rule: 8.8.2
  • Indirect Path / Medium / Middle, Right / No Let
The player in black/white needed to go behind the opponent as the ball was deep and the line was there. The striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball and then requested a let for interference, no let is allowed.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Stroke
Although there was no contact, the player in black was unable to attempt a shot because of the opponents position. 8.9.3 is valid where there has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Prevented swing / Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interference.
Rule: 8.11.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Lack of freedom to strike the ball / Stroke
There was interference and the ball would have hit the non-striker on a direct path to the front wall, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Medium / Middle, Left / Poor clearance / Stroke
The player in yellow hit a shot that bounced around the service box, which meant the opponent in black could not get access to the shot to play the volley. The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference; a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Easy / Front, Right / Poor clearance / Stroke
The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Hard / Middle, Left / Poor clearance / Stroke
The player in red hits a cross court quickly and the ball travels towards the middle.The player in black hits an attacking drive on the volley but the ball lands in front of the short line and you have to consider where the striking point is.The player in red moves early into the opponent.The player in black takes a wide base and does not let the opponent through.Stroke is the correct decision as the player in black is making it too difficult to get past.The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Front, Right / Hard / Stroke
The player in black hits a drop that catches the side wall.The player in grey moves towards the ball but has her access and position on the next shot obstructed by the opponent.Stroke is the correct decision.The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.2
  • Easy / Front, Left / No Let / Winning return
There was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return, so a no let is allowed
Rule: 8.6.2
  • Front, Left / Medium / No Let / Winning return
The player in yellow took the long way round and wouldn’t have recovered to make a good return. There was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return; no let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Front, Left / Medium / Unavoidable interference / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowedThe player in white plays a drop and steps back leaving a slight line of access on the inside, to the left of her. The player in grey is uncertain of which line to take and first moves right before moving left. Because access wasn’t obvious enough and the player in white provided access and the player in grey could have got the ball. Yes Let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.8.2
  • Front, Left / Hard / Indirect Path / No Let
The player in yellow was off balance from the previous shot and went for the opponent more than going to play the ball.Because the striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball and then requested a let for interference, no let is allowed.
Rule: 8.8.2
  • Front, Right / Hard / Indirect Path / No Let
The Striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball. The incoming striker’s initial movement went too far up the court and which then caused the interference. A no let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.9.1
  • Affected Swing / Back, Centre / Medium / Yes Let
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference; a let is allowed. The player in peach isn’t quite sure where the opponent is and makes slight contact in the preparation. A stroke would be too easy in this situation.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Poor clearance / Stroke
The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Prevented swing / Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interference
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Reasonable fear of injury / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, so a let is allowed. The player in blue could have made a good return but it was uncertain if a cross court was possible or if that cross court would have hit the opponent. For this reason a Let is awarded in this situation.
Rule: 8.6.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / No interference / No Let
The player in white hits a drive that catches the side wall and travels towards the middle of the court.The player in black is preparing to hit a shot on the backhand and has to change to the forehand side to be able to hit a shot.The ball is travelling away from the player in black who is not in a position to hit the ball.No let is the correct decision.There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let is allowed.
Rule: 8.6.2
  • Back, Centre / Medium / Must play the ball / No Let
The front view shows that the striker went the wrong way and never corrected her balance to be able to change direction and get the ball. The situation was solely created by the striker. No let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.6.1
  • Back, Centre / Medium / No Let / Winning return
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let isallowed.The player in yellow was not ready to play the shot.
Rule: 8.9.1
  • Affected Swing / Back, Centre / Easy / Yes Let
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowedThe ball was close to the striker and the opponent was just clearing enough.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Prevented swing / Stroke
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply. So, the striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Centre / Hard / Interference / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a yes let is allowed.The player in blue holds for a long time, the balls second bounce is in front of both players. In order to hit the shot, the player in blue needs to take a step forward which would mean there is less interference which warrants the yes let decision.
Rule: 8.11.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Lack of freedom to strike the ball / Stroke
There was interference and the ball would have hit the non-striker on a direct path to the front wall, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Back, Centre / Medium / Prevented swing / Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker. The player in blue wants to hit the shot, but as he is going to play, the player in grey makes a movement towards the ball which creates enough interference for a stroke to be awarded. If the player in grey had held the position, it would have been a let.
Rule: 8.6.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Interference / Yes Let
The ball would first have hit the non-striker and then a side wall before reaching the front wall, a let is allowed
Rule: 8.9.1
  • Affected Swing / Back, Centre / Easy / Yes Let
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowed.
Rule: 8.6.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Prevented swing / Stroke
The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Left / Easy / Interference / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, so a let is allowed.The ball was loose but there was also space between the players and the ball.
Rule: 8.11.1
  • Back, Centre / Easy / Lack of freedom to strike the ball / Stroke
There was interference and the ball would have hit the non-striker on a direct path to the front wall, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Easy / Middle, Left / Prevented swing / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed.The player in yellows shot lands short which makes this a let. Even with the ball missing the target, there is a case to ask the player in black to show more willing to go and play the ball.
Rule: 8.9.3
  • Affected Swing / Back, Centre / Medium / Yes Let
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent. There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, so a yes let is allowed.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Back, Centre / Medium / Poor clearance / Stroke
The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Right / Interference / Medium / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed.There was sufficient interference but also a line behind the opponent. Yes let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.10.2
  • Back, Centre / Exaggerated Swing / Medium / Yes Let
There was interference but the striker exaggerated the swing in attempting to earn a stroke, a let is allowed. The shoulders of the player in blue turn in an exaggerated way which indicate searching for the opponent. The ball is travelling away from the player in blue’s preparation.
Rule: 8.6.2
  • Back, Centre / Medium / No Let / Winning return
There was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return, no let is allowed
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Back, Centre / Medium / Reasonable fear of injury / Yes Let
The player in grey just gives enough room for there to be enough doubt whether a cross court would hit him or not for Rule 8.11.1 not to be applied. Therefore a Yes Let is the correct decision for safety.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Hard / Middle, Right / Prevented swing / Stroke
The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
Rule: 8.9.2
  • Back, Centre / Hard / Prevented swing / Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interference.The player in pink hits a crosscourt lob that comes out towards the middle. The player in blue attempts to strike the ball but makes heavy contact with the opponent. Although the swing was not prevented, the trajectory and result of the shot was completely altered due to the contact of the swing. Therefore a stroke is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.6.6
  • Front, Left / Hard / Interference / Yes Let
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowedThere player in blue plays a drop and makes every effort to clear. The player in pink encounters enough interference through contact with the hip and would have made a good return. Yes let is the correct decision.
Rule: 8.6.2
  • Front, Left / Hard / No Let / Winning return
There was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return, no let is allowed.The player in blue was a long way from the ball when the appeal for a let was made.
Rule: 8.6.5
  • Front, Right / Hard / Poor clearance / Stroke
The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.The player played a shot that came back towards her and didn’t clear. The player in white would have made a good return and had no access.
Rule: 8.6.4
  • Hard / Middle, Left / Minimal interference / No Let
There was minimal interference that did not prevent the striker from seeing and getting to the ball to make a good return.This is a close one as the player in peach stays on the line for a fraction longer than he should but the player in grey does not go towards the ball. No let is the correct decision.
Back To Top