In one of Friday’s mixed doubles semifinals from the PPA Veolia Sacramento Open, James Ignatowich and Anna Bright faced Dylan Frazier and Tyra Black. It was a very long and competitive match, where Ignatowich and Bright came back to win in three games after trailing by a game and down 5-0 to start game two. In addition, Ignatowich and Bright fought off a match point later in game two.

 

During the hotly contested game two, Ignatowich hit a winning overhead, but the referee noticed something had dropped in front of Ignatowich into the non-volley zone. Causing what Dave Fleming jokingly called “stickergate”, the referee found that the paddle testing approval sticker on Ignatowich’s paddle had come off and fallen into the non-volley zone. It was dislodged by the force of Ignatowich’s big overhead. The referee called it a violation of the non-volley zone and a fault.

 

 

Ignatowich and Bright protested the call. Don Stanley was called to the scene of “stickergate” and confirmed the fault call was correct. Play proceeded and as Ignatowich and Bright ultimately won game two, the ruling had no effect on the outcome. But was the call correct?

 

Rule 9.B is the first rule that applies: “it is a fault if the volleying player or anything that has contact with the volleying player while in the act of volleying touches the non-volley zone.” Ok, but what is the act of volleying? That is answered by Rule 9.B.1, which says “The act of volleying the ball includes the swing, the follow-through, and the momentum from the action.”

 

So, the referees made the right ruling in “stickergate”. The sticker was on Ignatowich’s paddle when the volley was made, so it “had contact with the volleying player” and whether it came off during the overhead or the follow-through does not matter; either way, it is a fault.

 

Now, what happens if someone’s sweat flies off during a volley and hits in the non-volley zone? Well, I guess we will have to wait for another day for “sweatgate.”

 

Follow me on Twitter/x @pickleball_jim