- Back, 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 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.
- Middle, Left
- Hard
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, Center
- 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.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.
- 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 player in blue attempts to stay out of the way for as long as possible, especially as the ball comes round a long way. By the time the striker wants to play the ball, the cross court is a very difficult shot, so yes let is the correct decision.
- 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.Safety let on the follow through, the ball was high and by the time the player in blue could hit, the opponent was clear.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
- 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.
- 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.
- 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, Left / Medium / No Let / Winning return
The player in yellow hit a winning shot, even though there was some interference, the striker would not have been able to make a good return; no let is the correct decision.
- 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, Right / Medium / No interference / No Let
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, therefore a no let is allowed.The player in white has to run the diagonal length of the court. The player in burgundy plays a volley from a central position. There is distance between the players and the ball. There is also access to the ball. No Let is the correct decision.
- Medium / Middle, Left / No interference / No Let
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let is allowed.Need the player to be looking to hit this ball at the professional level. In a club match, it may be more of a let for safety depending on the level.
- 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.
- 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.
- Easy / Middle, Right / Poor clearance / Stroke
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, but 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, 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.
- 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.
- Front, Left / Medium / Poor clearance / Stroke
Although you don’t want players running into the back of an opponent, in this instance, the player in black hits a drop and stands back square from the shot, this means that there is no access to either side possible. In this instance, the player in black is more at fault. The player in yellow pushed up high and anticipated the drop. The striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, therefore a stroke is awarded to the striker.
- Easy / Front, Left / 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 strikerThe shot came back towards the non-striker, which put the player in the direct line of the striker
- 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 / 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.
- 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.
- Front, Right / Medium / 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.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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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 / 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 / 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 / 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 / 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 / Prevented swing / Stroke
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, so a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interference.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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, Left / Easy / Minimal interference / No Let
The player in black needs to go and play that ball, as there was interference, but it did not prevent the striker from seeing and getting to the ball to make a good return. The player in yellow had provided access to the ball, this is minimal interference and no let is the correct decision.
- 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
- Easy / Middle, Right / No interference / No Let
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let is allowed.
- 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
- Affected Swing / Easy / Middle, Right / 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
- 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, so a yes let is allowed.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- Medium / Middle, Right / Must play the ball / 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.
- 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.
- Hard / Middle, Left / No Let / Winning return
There was interference but the player in black would not have been able to make a good return, no let is allowed.
- 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.
- Hard / Middle, Right / Poor clearance / Stroke
The player in green hits a high shot that travels all the way back to the middle of the court.The player in white hits a shot that bounces high and holds position which means that there is not access for the opponent.The player in green’s line was through the opponent and he would have made a good return.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.
- 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 / 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.