Video
- Back, Center
- Easy
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.
- Front, Right
- 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.This is a let for safety but the player in black could have hit the ball at a professional level. In the amateur game, this is more likely to be a stroke.
- Middle, Left
- Medium
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.
- 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.
- Easy / Front, Left / 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 allowed.
- Back, Centre / Easy / Turning / Yes Let
The non-striker had no time to avoid the interference, a let is allowed.The player in blue allows the ball to roll round the wall and turns before requesting a let, if this was done on a number of occasions, a no let would be correct. On this occasion it is a let.
- Back, Left / Hard / Interference / 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.
- 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.
- Medium / Middle, Right / 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 allowed.Ball lands shorter than both expect, non-striker is looking to step out of the way. Striker encounters sufficient interference, so a yes, let is the correct decision.
- Easy / Front, 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
- Back, Left / Medium / Must play the ball / 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.The player in blue hits a volley to the back. The player in pink’s initial movement is up the court before moving towards the ball where she encounters interference. The interference is minimal, therefore a no let is the correct decision.The explanation to the player is, you must play that ball.
- 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.
- Easy / Front, Left / No Let / Winning return
There was interference but the striker would not have been able to make a good return, no let is allowed
- Front, Right / Indirect Path / Medium / No Let
The first step of the player in blue was up the court and the drop went deeper which meant the player was out of position to get the shot. 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
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Interference / Medium / Middle, Left / 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 in white/black wants to step forward to hit the shot and cannot take it at the point she wishes to strike because of the opponents late movement across her path and position.
- Back, Centre / Medium / Prevented swing / 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.
- 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
- Back, Right / 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, and, the striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponentwas not able to avoid the interference, so a stroke is awarded to the striker.Even though every effort was being made by the player in yellow, there was no chance for the player in black to hit the ball.
- 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.
- 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.
- Easy / Front, Left / Indirect Path / 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 was interference but the player in blue doesn’t move anywhere and there is distance to the shot. No let is the correct call.
- 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.
- 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.
- Front, Left / 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 allowedThe player in pink just does enough to provide some access for this to be a let.
- 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.
- 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.
- Back, Centre / Medium / Prevented swing / Stroke
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, 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 as there was no chance of a follow through.
- Back, Centre / Exaggerated Swing / 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.
- 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, a let is allowedThe striker just clipped the non-striker preventing access at the point when he wanted to take the ball.
- 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
- Back, Centre / Easy / Poor clearance / 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.
- Back, Left / Easy / Minimal interference / No Let
There was a small amount 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.
- 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, a let is allowed
- 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.
- Back, Centre / Medium / Prevented swing / 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.
- Back, Centre / Easy / 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, the provisions of 8.6 apply 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 player in black shaped and was not sure of the opponents position after a loose shot. Yes let is the correct decision
- Back, Left / 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.
- 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.
- 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, a let is allowed.The referee had to judge how far the ball came off the back wall, could the striker in peach hit the ball straight or cross court and had the opponent stayed far enough to one side. In this situation there is enough doubt and a risk of safety. Yes Let is the correct decision
- Easy / Interference / Middle, Centre / 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 allowedFeet of the striker trip on those of the non-striker.
- 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.
- 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.
- Front, Right / Indirect Path / Medium / 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 grey hits a good shot. The player in blue’s racket preparation and line to the ball is more towards the opponent than a genuine effort to play the shot. “No Let, I need you to go to the ball and not the opponent” is the correct decision and explanation.
- 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.
- Back, Left / 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.Player in blue hits a shot that she doesn’t clear very well, the player in pink would have made a good return but also moves towards the opponent slightly. Therefore, a yes let is the correct decision.
- Medium / Middle, Left / 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 player in blue prevents the player in white from preparing the racket with her position and the follow through would have hit the opponent.
- 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 yes let is allowed.The shot was not good enough for a no let and the contact between the players was enough to throw the player in black off the shot.
- 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.
- 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.
- Hard / 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, the provisions of 8.6 apply. 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. By the time the payer in dark red is ready to strike, the ball is slightly behind him, there is space to play the shot straight, and to cross-court the player in dark red would have to flick the ball. A flicked cross-court would not hit the opponent. Therefore a let is the correct decision.
- Front, Left / Hard / 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; not let is the correct decision.
- 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.
- 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.
- Affected Swing / Back, Centre / Hard / Yes Let
This falls into 8.9.3, 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. The player in yellow held for some time and by the time the player in black was preventing the swing, there was doubt as to which shot the striker could play. Therefore, the swing was affected by the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference, so a let is allowed.
