Rule question

[speedplay]

Here is a rule question for all of you,

I return my opponents serve, it clips the net, then bounce on the net post on his side of the table, he leans forward and hit the ball past me. Who have won the point and why?

[pingpongrob]

Slippery Speedplay, this is a very complicated question with many answers I guess. As the Posts are considered part of the Net assembly, I would have said the your oppenant actually hit the ball on the full and thus, the point is yours. If he had let the ball bounce on his side of the table after it hit the Net post, and then he could have hit it for a winner.

[big ears]

It is his point, the net and net post, are not part of the table, and you have to hit the table on your opponents side to make a good return. This is a question that returns from time to time.
If the ball hits the net, then the net post, THEN the table, the shot is good, because the net and the netpost are seen as one, and the ball can hit the net more than once on its journey to the other side of the table.

[speedplay]

It is his point, the net and net post, are not part of the table, and you have to hit the table on your opponents side to make a good return. This is a question that returns from time to time.
If the ball hits the net, then the net post, THEN the table, the shot is good, because the net and the netpost are seen as one, and the ball can hit the net more than once on its journey to the other side of the table.

Actually, because the net post isn't considered a part of the table, it is my point since he hit the ball after it made contact with the net post, which is the same as volleying the ball, which isn't allowed. So, unless my point bounced on the net post and over the entire table, it is my point. In this case, he hit the ball above the table after the bounce on the net post. He didn't like my explanation as to why he lost the point and I think he felt like he was the nice guy when he agreed to play it over ::) And yes, I did agree to this as well, even though I know it was my point.

[big ears]

Sorry, I did not read the question properly, I missed him hitting the ball, you are absolutely right, he has technically make an illegal volley.

[pingpongrob]

So Speedplay, My Answer is 100% Correct - Not just a pretty face. >:D

[big ears]

Ok another one.
 
Can a player play with two bats, one in each hand?

[speedplay]

Ok another one.
 
Can a player play with two bats, one in each hand?

Probably not, while there isn't anything in the rules that clearly states that it is forbidden, the rules mention the bat hand and the free hand, both in singulars, which goes to show that only one bat is allowed to be used. How ever, he is allowed to change hand with this one bat.

Which leads me to another question, sort of related, I know it is legal to use both hands to hold the bat (which kind of proves my earlier theory wrong) but if I do this, which hand is then accounted for as my bat hand?

[blue_smartie68]

Interesting that this should come up now (the first example)
In a match last night, I made an angled push which caught the net, rolled along the top for a bit then fell to the opponents side very close to the net post and landed on the top edge of the net post bracket which sits flat on the table (the top part of the clamp). The ball then bounced off this edge and off the side of the table, and I don't think it actually touched the table surface as such..but basically looked like it did as the bracket part is almost flush with the playing suface... ???
The umpire awarded me the point and my opponent seemed happy with that and mentioned he'd never seen that happen before!
Now....is the bracket considered a part of the net, like the post?...and if so, technically my shot failed to land on the table and the point should have been awarded against me?? :-\
 
Cheers,
Chris

[pingpongrob]

Interesting that this should come up now (the first example)
In a match last night, I made an angled push which caught the net, rolled along the top for a bit then fell to the opponents side very close to the net post and landed on the top edge of the net post bracket which sits flat on the table (the top part of the clamp). The ball then bounced off this edge and off the side of the table, and I don't think it actually touched the table surface as such..but basically looked like it did as the bracket part is almost flush with the playing suface... ???
The umpire awarded me the point and my opponent seemed happy with that and mentioned he'd never seen that happen before!
Now....is the bracket considered a part of the net, like the post?...and if so, technically my shot failed to land on the table and the point should have been awarded against me?? :-\
 
Cheers,
Chris

The Bracket and any part of the Net Structure is considered part of the "NET Asembly". So it it didnt touch the Table then the point should have been awarded to your oppenants. I have been in many arguements with players down at Sunbury for not understanding the rules correctly.

[pingpongrob]

Ok another one.
 
Can a player play with two bats, one in each hand?

Definetely Not, and their is a rule that justifies my answer. One rubber must be Red and the Opposite side must be black, your also not allowed to swap bats in a rally or unless your equipment is unintentionally damaged.

[blue_smartie68]

The Bracket and any part of the Net Structure is considered part of the "NET Asembly". So it it didnt touch the Table then the point should have been awarded to your oppenants. I have been in many arguements with players down at Sunbury for not understanding the rules correctly.

Ok, well I didn't realise that last night...or I wouldn't have accepted the point.
 
As it turns out, it didn't matter as I lost the match 10-12 in the forth... but the scorecard shows we both won 40 points in total! That sucks eh! 
Chris  8)

[JKC]

I have been in many arguements with players down at Sunbury for not understanding the rules correctly.

I'm sure you'll get the hang of the rules eventually Rob.

[pingpongrob]

I'm sure you'll get the hang of the rules eventually Rob.

Ha Ha, So Funny.

[Vinnie]

What about 2 bats in the one hand?

[blue_smartie68]

Why would anyone want two bats in one hand Vinnie?? ???
 
Probably more important, how about a bat in one hand and a can of bourbon in the other?  ;) ;D

[pingpongrob]

in, my earlier days I played a fella that could play with his right hand and left hand, he would swap at random, it was strange watching him return a wide ball with either hand.

[blue_smartie68]

I knew a guy like that once Rob, he was a cricketer and could hook a ball for six on both sides of the pitch!  :c029:
The bowlers had no idea how to bowl to him  :41:   :85:
 
OMG, these new emoticons are confusing! lol  :confuse:
 

[Vinnie]

Why would anyone want two bats in one hand Vinnie?? ???
 
Probably more important, how about a bat in one hand and a can of bourbon in the other?  ;) ;D

What about if the handles were flat on both bats, and then you held them together, and also got power from the bat behind the ohter one?

Also, these new emoticons are really putting me off the way they are moving about, Rob. A better idea might be to make this in the {More} section, so we don't have to look at them all everytime we post.