The New York herald., 1922-01-29
OPPOSE THROWING
POINTS in Tennis
Umpires Association Opens
Propaganda to Discour-
age Practice.
UNFAIR TO OFFICIALS
Disrespect Of Rules, Which
Make Linesmen and UNI
pires Sole Judges.
UNFAIR TO OFFICIALS

Throwing points will be discouraged
mis- Umpires Association has its way.
For several years this organization has
provided officials for the important ten
mis- events and so it's members have had
practices at close range. In outlining
the umpires' attitude on this matter, r.
Clifford Black, who is chairman of the
umpires association, said:
Lawn tennis has its paradox. Why
should a player striving to win delib-
erately give points to his opponent II he
thinks a mistake has been made in his
favor by a linesman or umpire? it is
undoubtedly due to the fine sporting
ideals Of tennis not found in any other
game Imagine the baseball pitcher re-
plying by throwing the next ball wide OF
the plate If he thinks the umpire has
unjustly called strike!
Historically, the practice probably
started with the visits of the Dohertys
to this country. The lining was poor
in those days and the galleries ap-
p!auded the players actions as evidences
of good sportsmanshiD. Our players
copied them and while there is no doubt
that the practice is falling rapidly into
disuse it is still seen occasionally
players should be made to feel that
the time has come to stop this throw
ing of points With the better class OF
unpiring that has been inaugurated by
the Tennis Umpires Association during
the past few years the last excuse has
disappeared This excuse was to show
an extreme spirit of fairness to ones
opponent Against the practice many
arguments have been marshalled. IL
is a direct reflection on the ability or
hard working umpire or linesman. TX
players can better decide themselves.
why have linesmen at all? Besides, the
player is quite as likely to be wrong "a
the official. It savors strongly OF gal
lery play and is done in no other game.
1t shows disrespect to the rules of lawn
tennis, which make the umpire and
linesmen the only judges of play. IT
puts an opponent in an embarrassing
position. for he may consider a later
decision doubtful only and be upset by
the thought that the same thing is now
expected OF him.
Even in the case OF a nalpably wrong
decision the throwing OF the following
point does not give an opponent his just
due. For instance let us suppose the
players starting game. The point Is
called in favor OF the server, unjustly,
he thinks; the score is Is love and the
server is leading by one full point. ~
the point had been, in his opinion. cor
rectly called the receiver would he lead
ing by full poipt-iove 5. II he then
throws the next point the score is only
even--t5 all. But IL the receiver is
entitled to full justice. he should be in
the lead, and il the server is absolutely
fair and good sportsman" lie should
now proceed to throw another point.
making the score 1880 against him.
SELF No one In the Umpires Associa-
ton. or any one else for that matter.
has ever seen a player throw two points
in succession. @
why not discontinue the ridiculous
practice altogether? With every mem
Der of the IT. L. A. against 1t, what is
the best way to bring these unanswer-
able arguments to the attention of the
player and spectator? We seek advice"