This may seem surprising, even almost impossible to imagine:  A player asks to leave the track to go to the toilet… and the referee can say no. 

However, it is explicitly stated in the regulations. Premier Padel 2026.

The rule obviously does not mean that a referee can arbitrarily refuse any bathroom break. It targets a very specific case: when the request is considered an attempt to waste time, disrupt the flow of the match, or as a  blatant abuse of the regulation .

This is not a problem unique to padel. Professional tennis has experienced several high-profile controversies in recent years surrounding "toilet breaks," to the point that the ATP has had to significantly tighten its rules.

"Denying a player request": the rule is very clear

The layout appears in the section  6.2.3  of the male regulations Premier Padel 2026.

Its title is:

 “Denying a player request” i.e  "Refusing a player's request" .

The text states precisely:

 “The Chair Umpire and/or Supervisor shall have the authority to deny a player permission to leave the court during a match to go to the restroom if the Referee and/or Supervisor interprets it as gamesmanship and/or flagrant abuse of the rules.” 

In other words:

 "The Chair Umpire and/or the Supervisor have the authority to refuse a player permission to leave the court during a match to go to the restroom if the Referee and/or the Supervisor considers this request to be gamesmanship and/or a blatant abuse of the rules." 

The word  "gamesmanship"  is important.

Here it refers to the use of a regulated situation for a tactical purpose: to break the rhythm, disrupt the opponent or seek to obtain an advantage that is not directly related to the game.

Promo poster featuring a man on a panel, with bold text 'TOILET? REQUEST DENIED.' and speech bubble 'NO. PARTY FIRST.'; Premier Padel visible branding; audience in foreground.

The same rule applies to women.

On this point, there is no difference between men and women.

The women's regulations reproduce almost word for word the same provision:

 “…deny a player permission to leave the court during a match to go to the bathroom…” 

is :

 "Refusing a player permission to leave the court during a match to go to the toilet" 

when the request is interpreted as  gamesmanship  or a  flagrant abuse of the rules .

A player cannot leave the track freely in any case.

This rule is part of a more general principle.

During a match, a player cannot simply leave the track on his own initiative.

The Code of Conduct specifies:

 “A player shall not leave the court area during a match (…) without the Chair Umpire or Supervisor/Referee's permission.” 

Is :

 "A player must not leave the playing area during a match without the permission of the Chair Umpire or the Supervisor/Referee." 

And the penalty is not insignificant.

Leaving the track without authorization can result  a fine of up to 3,000 euros , possibly with additional sanctions.

In summary: even when it comes to going to the toilet,  the player must request permission .

But can the referee really know if the need is "real"?

This is obviously where the rule becomes tricky.

The rules do not require the referee to determine whether the player actually needs to go to the toilet.

That's not his role.

The regulatory criterion is different:  the way in which the request is used in the context of the match .

The Referee or Supervisor must consider that it constitutes gamesmanship or a  “blatant abuse of the rules” , a  "flagrant abuse of the regulations" , in order to be able to refuse it.

In other words, the text aims more  the tactical use of the pause  than the physiological need itself.

What if there really is an emergency?

This is a crucial distinction.

The passage we studied does not say that a referee must refuse a break when a player has a genuine medical problem.

Premier Padel It also has specific medical rules and a system allowing medical personnel to intervene in case of a physical problem.

It would therefore be excessive to summarize this provision as:

 « Premier Padel can prevent a sick player from going to the toilet. 

That's not what the regulations say.

The correct wording is rather:

 Premier Padel allows the referee or supervisor to refuse a toilet break request when it is considered abusive or tactical. 

Why such a rule?

To understand the logic, you just need to look at what happened in tennis.

Toilet breaks have long been a sensitive subject on the professional circuit because they can interrupt a match for several minutes, precisely at important moments.

And one of the most famous cases dates back to the 2021 US Open.

Murray – Tsitsipas: the controversy that marked tennis

In the first round of the 2021 US Open,  Stefanos Tsitsipas  faces Andy Murray.

The Greek player took several long breaks during the match, including a significant interruption before the fifth set.

At the time,  No specific maximum duration was planned for the toilet break. and Tsitsipas himself points out that he had not broken any rules.

Andy Murray, however, is finding these interruptions very difficult to cope with.

After his defeat, the Briton publicly criticized the situation, arguing that the breaks had affected the pace of the match. The controversy then grew considerably.

Tsitsipas was booed again a few days later after a break that caused about eight minutes of interruption during his next match in New York.

The ATP eventually changed its rules

The controversy is part of a broader discussion on the strategic use of breaks.

Starting with the 2022 season, the ATP is introducing much stricter regulations:  only one toilet break per match , with a maximum duration of  three minutes from the moment the player enters the toilet A break combining toileting and changing clothes can last up to five minutes.

The ATP 2026 regulations still maintain this logic of strictly regulated time.

In other words, tennis has gradually sought to prevent a physiological break from becoming  a tactical tool .

Padel follows the same logic.

That is precisely what the word covers  gamesmanship  used by Premier Padel.

Let's imagine a situation.

A pair has just lost five consecutive games. Their opponent is on a roll. Just before a crucial moment, a player asks to leave the court.

If the arbitrator considers that this request is clearly a strategy intended to disrupt the opposing team's momentum rather than a normal application of the rule,  the regulation gives him the power to say no .

This is obviously only a theoretical example to illustrate how the text works.

The decision depends in all cases on the assessment of the Referee or the Supervisor.

And abuse can be punished.

The regulation does not simply authorize refusal.

The following section specifies:

 “Players shall be penalized in accordance with the Code of Conduct Defined Penalties for any abuse of this rule.” 

Is :

 "Players will be sanctioned in accordance with the penalties defined in the Code of Conduct for any abuse of this rule." 

A request deemed abusive may therefore not only be refused, but may also lead to disciplinary proceedings depending on the circumstances.

Can we still leave?

That would be risky.

As stated above, leaving the track during the match without the referee's permission constitutes a violation of the Code of Conduct.

The player then risks a fine of up to  3 000 euros , or even to additional sanctions related to not finishing the match properly.

The theoretical situation thus becomes quite clear:

 Request refused + player who leaves anyway = possible additional offence. 

A strange rule… but ultimately quite logical

Read out of context, the sentence might raise a smile:

 "A referee can prevent a player from going to the toilet." 

But its logic becomes much clearer when placed in the history of racket sports.

The problem isn't really the toilet break.

The problem is  its potential tactical use .

Tennis has experienced controversies significant enough to warrant the establishment of very precise time limits. Premier Padel He too chose to regulate the phenomenon by giving the arbitration body an explicit power of refusal when it considers that there is gamesmanship or blatant abuse.

And the 2026 regulations therefore leave little room for doubt:

 Yes, a player Premier Padel He may ask to go to the toilet. But no, this request is not automatically granted. 

In certain circumstances,  The referee can tell him: no. 

Franck Binisti

Franck Binisti discovered padel at the Club des Pyramides in 2009 in the Paris region. Since then, padel has been part of his life. You often see him touring France to cover major French padel events.

On the same subject

Tags