AGENDA ITEMS SUGGESTIONS
FOR THE APTA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

By Charles E. Vasoll

What is on the agenda for the APTA Board of Directors meeting? I don’t know, of course, but I hope they will not overlook these items.

A high priority, I believe, should be additional financial support for the Platform Tennis Museum and Hall of Fame Foundation. The Foundation is a separate, independent, non-profit corporation that is seeking to create a “bricks and mortar” home for the historical momentos of the sport and a place to recognize the individuals inducted into its Hall of Fame.

The Board of Trustees of the Foundation is in conversation with the Village of Scarsdale officials to erect a building at Brite Avenue Park. Negotiations are moving ahead but there are costs involved. The APTA is deeply involved in support of the Foundation’s plans but so far has not made any financial contribution. A token amount of a few thousand dollars should be considered now.

A second item for the agenda should be a renewed emphasis on providing training and experience for a nation-wide supply of qualified umpires. I am convinced that the importance of this role in our sport has been underestimated. It is essential, in my opinion, to have a person “in the chair” at our National Championships and ranking tournaments. Umpires should not only be in place in the final but also in the semis. Umpiring is not an easy task and the pay is minimal. Tournament Chairman, I am sure, are willing to include the fee in their budgets. Their problem is locating qualified persons. The APTA should make a strong effort to solve this shortage.

There are many other matters that I feel need attention. Some are major, controversial and need study. For example, the “term limits” provision for APTA Directors incorporated into its by-laws several years ago should be reworked. It is causing loss of dedicated and good thinking Directors from leadership in the sport.

Another concern to me is the lack of regulation in court design. There appears to be no control over the color of the court and sidelines paint, for example. Even the “gap” in the side service line is happening without direction or specification. I am not opposing these incentives by court builders but the APTA should be setting forth directions and limitations. It should not be the free terrain of the court builders.

Finally, there is the ball. I have been convinced for some time that the “flocking” is not necessary. It is a delicate operation and expensive to provide and yet has no effect on the play of the game. It should be removed from the specifications and the ball made with a yellow colored rubber. I understand it can be done. The APTA has to open the door to this possibility.

I am certain that the Board has a full agenda. Some of these suggestions will need study and outside expertise, but they should not be ignored.

Oh, yes, I didn’t even get into the “Platform Tennis” publication, the web site, foot faults and bad back draw behavior. Enough for now…more about these next season.

Best wishes for a successful meeting.

Click HERE to Return to September 2006 Article

Click HERE to Return to Archives