shuttle deflects off post and into play

[Sum]

The shuttle hit the top of the pole and landed on the floor, inside the line. Is this in or out ?

[Byro-Nenium]

ITs out

[david]

It's IN

[Byro-Nenium]

Top of the pole! Sorry i didn't realise that i was speed reading, i'm not sure but according to david its in....

[Sum]

I desperately need the firmed answer.

[Normand]

If the pole is properly located (on the doubles side lines) then the shot is in.

[Sum]

Thanh a bunch, it sounds sensible.

[Sum]

Thank a bunch, it sounds sensible.

[Jeff]

woudlnt it be considered a let?

[Zclyh3]

Yeah, it should be a let. Cause it's not suppose to hit the poles.

[Mike]

It is not a let. It is IN.
Go to IBF and check it out. Only if it is caught at the net that it's considered a let.

[kwun]

it is in. as long as it is not hitting the inside of the pole. there is no rule saying that it should be counted as out.

and i believe if the shuttle were to go around the side of the pole, touching it or not, and then comes back into the court, that's counted in as well.

[cooler]

During one tournament i had a chance to chat (more like interrogation) with the head unmpire that was on a break. I drilled him many many questions that were not in the book, or not descriptive enough in the book and other weird situation that i can dream of. You know me ;) Well, to make a long story short....in Sum's case, it's OUT.

[Sum]

Ahha, so the pole is not considered as a part of the game, right.
That is my initial reaction to this situation, but my opponent insisted that the shuttle hit the line, rather than the pole.

[david]

Even if the shuttle were to fly around the building or maybe around the world (if it is possible) and then finally touches inside the line, it is still considered IN.

as long as it does not touch any of the player.

FINAL ANSWER : IT'S IN

[kwun]

i tend to agree with david, but if using this umpire's judgement, the only rule that i can see apply is this:

it is a fault if the shuttle:

13.2.6 touches any other object or person outside the immediate surroundings of the court;

so in other words, the pole is outside the immediate surroundings of the court. which is a believeable interpretation, but quite <i>borderline</i> IMHO. :)

[Sum]

I agree with your case. But in this case, the shuttle hit the top. If it did not have the top there, the shuttle could be out.

[cooler]

since Sum had asked whether 'in or out', i gave you guys the 'out' answer. In reality, the umpire would call it fault, as rationalized by kwun. But i don't know how kwun rationalize david's interpretation?

[marshall]

According to the rule Kwun cited, to be out the shuttle has to strike an object *outside* the immediate surroundings of the court. If the poles are on the doubles lines (and the game is doubles), then it is reasonable to say the poles are not outside the immediate surroundings of the court. On this interpretation striking the top of the pole would be no worse than striking the net cord.

[Brett]

I have never seen this situation happen in the past year and a half. The several times I can recall a shuttle hitting the post it either bounce out or backwards, definitely not over and in the other court. Just curious here, but how often have any of you encountered this situation with the bird hitting the post and going in?

It seems that the inside-outside of the post sub-argument has a pretty easy answer. If the shuttle hits the outside (i.e. side away from the court) of the post with sufficient power to be noticed, it seems like basic physics would require the shuttle to rebound or deflect from the post, thereby going out of the court.

[kwun]

law of physics... if the shuttle passes by the outside pole within a few microns and the pole is so heavy compare to the shuttle that it gravitation force creates a "slingshot" effect, thus drawing the shuttle back into the court...

[kwun]

as for how often this happens, one of these days, you may be playing the finals of your favorite local tournament, you are on your 3rd game, you have your 2nd service at 16-16, and <b>whack</b>, the shuttle hit to top of the pole and lands on the inside of your opponent court..............

[kwun]

i was actually questioning the umpire's implied interpretation that "the poles are outside of the court's immediate surroundings".

when i said the case was "borderline", i really meant it literally, the pole marks the boundary between the court and it's surrounding (outside). since the birdie on the boundary lines are call IN in badminton, i think it makes more sense for it to be in play when the shuttle hits the pole.

however, not all rules are sensical.

[kwun]

i found a clause in the Laws of badminton that can clarify our confusion:

A shuttle is not in play when:

15.2 it strikes the net or post and starts to fall towards the surface of the court on the striker's side of the net;

in other words, if the shuttle strikes the pole and fall towards the <i>receiver side</i> of the court, it is still IN PLAY, and thus if it falls inside the court on the receiver side, it should be called IN.

[cooler]

Sum's situation would never happen in real IBF sanctioned tournaments as the net posts are stationed outside the line. Since non-qualified posts doesnt conform to IBF badminton equipment specification, the non-qualified posts stationed on the line itself are and should be considered as an outside object. Yes, under recreational environment, i would call it IN too as it is a amazing shot (i did it once too and saw twice done it by my badminton friends). But if u ask an umpire to official Sum's game, that umpire would call it OUT. Since 99% of recreational players doesn't know what's what in the IBF rule book, it is hard for them to accept the real official verdict.

[Brett]

Wow Kwun, you must be using some plutonium core posts out in CA! Maybe you have been sneaking them out of nuclear reactors, which would also explain why your state has no power. There are a lot of pissed off Holleywood types sitting in the dark worrying about the heat effecting their hair styles and their 2000 bottle, no longer 57 degrees, wine cellars, who would try to run you down with their Porche Boxsters if they found out about your little game....

Your tournament match scenario is not impossible, but I'm guessing you haven't run into this situation before either? Maybe I'm just not quick and mobile enough (one of my 126 weaknesses playing this sport), but I can't really remember getting that far out of court to hit a shot that could go in after hitting the top of the post.

I had something vaguely like that happen last week, but just in casual league play. It was a really close doubles game, we were serving at 15-14 and I hit a drive too hard, but it nicked one of my opponents' racquet before going out. I heard the shuttle-racquet contact, my partner distinctly heard the contact and I think the other opposing player did too, from the uncertain expression on his face at his partner's reaction. However, the first opp. player maintained, very adamently, that the shuttle had not touched his racquet and that he heard nothing. I suggested we replay the point, but we ended up just giving it to him. Unfortunately, after about four or five side outs without scoring, they went on a little three-point streak and that was the match. The game did not mean anything, though, and my hard-of-hearing friend is a good guy, so I'm sure it was just an honest mistake. Maybe I'll bring him some Q-Tips tonight. :)

[kwun]

yeah. those hollywood type, if they want power, just come by to our local gym here, let us smash at them a few times, then they'll know what <b>power</b> really means. :)


you're right, i haven't ran into that scenarios before, it was just a extreme hypothetical situation, but hey you never know... :)

[cooler]

yes, logical sense say it would be IN. However, there are hundred of thousands of non IBF conforming posts found around school gyms, community halls, church gyms, recreational centres, etc and they are all different diameters, heights and method of attaching the net to the post. Some are even multipurpose posts used for volleyballs. The point is that not all school yard posts are 5' 1" tall. Anyway, this umpire that i was talking with say he would call it a fault. He say it's not because the post is on the line of not, it is because he do officialling in all different kind of places and cities, he cannot be sure what heights all the posts are, he only measures all the net heights before the tournaments. He doesn't go measure the post height nor has control on the type or the condition of the posts used.

Let revisit the two laws kwun had kindly digged up for us.

13.2.6 say striking any object outside the court are ruled out.
is in conflict with 15.2 if the posts are erected outside the out line, wouldn't it?

[cooler]

My comment about 99% of recreational players not knowing the rulebook does not imply to people of badmintoncentral. I was referring to badminton players that i played recreationally with. So sorry.

[cooler]

Sum, sorry if i've mislead you. I have went back and looked over many photos of IBF conforming net setup. Under those configuration, the shuttle rowing over the net and landed in should be called IN as correctly called by many poster here. The original interpretation derived from my conversation with the umpire was due to at that (college) tournament, all the badminton posts were anchored outside the double lines, so his ruling of shuttle hitting the top of post and landed in was considered OUT because the shuttle had to go out of bound to hit the post top.
So in conclusion, it really come down to whether the net setup conform 5' 1" high and the post located right on the double side lines.

[budi]

IT IS IN

[Pebulutangkis]

hey abt the pole thing my fren told me his fren actually ran so fast that he could not break and rammed into the pole head on, and the pole actually fell. that guy's head was bleeding like hell. i just cant imagine how the hell he can't break coz i know the surface he's playing on is not slippery.

[Kevin]

when you drop on the "tower" (where the net hang on <-- it stand OUT the field) and the shuttle bounch back into the field you score. My trainer said it was true but i still can't believe it. because every field have another standing of the "towers" and size. normally badminton equipment = racket , shuttle, field, net and players isnt it? :s why the *uc*in* "towers ? Are there already discussions at the badminton staff the erase that rule if it is really true?

[wildstyler]

I also want to know this too because I have done this several times in my club, but the people in my club said it does not count. So thank you for reminding me about this, Kevin. ;)

[Nanashi]

i guess it is legal because the net is attached to it... i dunno... whatever... never happened to me anyway...

[badrad]

from the original interpretation of the laws of badminton, if the shuttle hits the post which the net is connected, and continues over the net, it is still considered in play. the consideration however was for posts that are regulation height, and properly installed at the side of the court and the law did not originally anticipate multi-purpose posts that provide volley ball heights as well. unfortunately i have seen this interpretation of the rule to imply that hitting anywhere on this post, then the shuttle continuing onto the other side of the court to be considered in play, even though the post may be 1 or 2 feet from the side of the court (ie in some gyms the net is hanging over the court, with court posts standing maybe 1 to 2 feet from the side edge).

if this is a tournament or competition using this style of post, this rule must be clearly mentioned as to what is considered a fault or permitted.

[kwun]

there is a rule that says:

13. FAULTS
It is a 'fault':
13.2 if in play the shuttle:
13.2.6 touches any other object or person outside the immediate surroundings of the court;

i believe the support is considered outside the immediate surrounding of the court.

other objects that would be outside the immediate surrounding would be:

- the service judge
- the box of used/unused shuttles
- the umpire's high chair

[Mikie]

BUT in the very beginning of the rules posts are included in the list of the court equipment (even though their height is restricted - but no instructions what 2 do if they are higher), so they are supposed to be part of the net (and not the part of "immediate surrounding") and therefore this shuttles should be ok - the player who made such a crazy shot should score. And BTW he/she deserves it, don't you think so?! ;)

[Mag]

I think Mikie is right. The poles are by definition part of the net.

[Slanter]

Yep, they are. Actually, at the very beginning the baseline was wider than the net and the court was shaped like an hourglass.

[Kevin]

oké then:-), then now i go pratice to hit the "tower" :p

[kwun]

"The Law" says:

1.4 The posts shall be 1.55 metres in height from the surface of the court and shall remain vertical when the net is strained as provided in Law 1.10.

1.5 The posts shall be placed on the doubles side lines as in Diagram A, irrespective of whether singles or doubles is being played.

i re-read Kevin's original post that prompted this discussion. he never mentioned whether the post is oversized or standard. i agree with badrad, if there are non-standard poles, the rules should be ammended by the local gym or tournament officials...

[badrad]

this was argued and had to have two officials to resolve during a tournament. the tournament was a small gym using multi-purpose standards the ones that have two sides and capable to support two volleyball nets. the standard is mounted almost 2 feet from the side of the court, a typical rec center scenario.

during play the shuttle was hit out of bounds, passed through the standard hitting a piece of the metal bar then falling back onto the opponent side in-bound. needless to say the argument that ensued - this was not clearly mentioned at the beginning of the tournament to outline the boundaries, so it was argued that the shuttle was legitimate, as per the badminton laws. for all practical purposes, the shuttle would have wound up hitting the wall or side court, but it was disputed.

after almost 10 minutes of arguing, the first official said it was a legal play. a second opinion was requested on the fact that the standard was not mounted in an official position therefore it was not considered part of the court. the second official declared that this was in fact not a regulation installation of the standard. and ruled it out. they had to make an announcement to clarify that since the posts were not install in the proper location, hitting of any post was considered a fault.

[dykp83]

hello everyone

what if my shot hits the netpost and deflects into the opposing half, and the opponent makes a mistake by hitting the shuttle to the net or shoots outside of the court (i.e. lose the rally).

Did i won the rally, or did i lose the rally when the shuttle hit the post?

It's an important question. Please help.

Thank you.

[Mag]

You won the rally.

It is NOT a fault if the shuttle hits the net post and your opponent touches it (or if it lands within court boundaries on his/hers side). Rule 15.2 of the Laws of Badminton applies here.

[dykp83]

Thanks a lot Mag !

Really appreciate it :)

[Neil Nicholls]

It might be open to debate if it was Singles.

If it was doubles I would say
You won the rally as long as the shuttle went either
a) over the net
OR
b) around the outside of the post


Law 13.2

It is a fault if in play, the shuttle
13.2.1 lands outside the boundaries of the court
13.2.2 passes through or under the net
13.2.3 fails to pass the net
13.2.4 touches the ceiling or side walls
13.2.5 touches the person or dress of a player
13.2.6 touches any other object or person outside the immediate surroundings of the court

None of 13.2 apply

13.2.6 comes close, but because of Laws

1.3 All lines form part of the area they define
1.5 The posts shall be placed on the doubles side lines irrespective of whether singles or doubles is being played.

In doubles, the posts are inside the boundaries of the court, so they cannot be "outside the immediate surroundings of the court"

In singles, the posts are outside the boundaries of the singles court, so are they "outside the immediate surroundings of the court"?
I don't know.

[Arcos]

You won the rally.

It is NOT a fault if the shuttle hits the net post and your opponent touches it (or if it lands within court boundaries on his/hers side). Rule 15.2 of the Laws of Badminton applies here.


this is assuming that the shuttle was over the net and hit the top part of the pole correct?

[Neil Nicholls]

I was thinking of a case where you hit the post and the shuttle lands in court on the other side of the net (without the opponent hitting it).

and part of Law 1.4 contradicts my deductions based on 1.3 and 1.5
1.4 ... Posts shall not extend into the court.


I confused myself because I was remembering a situation I was once in where I lost a rally.
In singles, I played a cross-court drop shot that would have been wide, but it hit the net, rolled over and landed in the tramlines....BUT, it landed on the foot of the support for the net post and bounced back into the singles court.

I tried to claim the point, but my opponent (my coach) refused.

[Winex West Can]

You won the rally.

It is NOT a fault if the shuttle hits the net post and your opponent touches it (or if it lands within court boundaries on his/hers side). Rule 15.2 of the Laws of Badminton applies here.

I don't see why dykp83 would have won the rally and I don't see why 15.2 would apply

A shuttle is not in play when:
15.2 it strikes the net or post and starts to fall towards the surface of the court on the striker’s side of the net;

I am assuming here that the reason why the shuttle would deflect off the post and in was because the post is taller than the net (which then would count as an obstruction). If the post is the same height as the net (as in regulations posts), then there is no way that a shuttle deflecting off the post can land on the opponent's court AND be over the net.

[cooler]

it depends on what kind of post.

this thread should clear things up

http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1551&highlight=post

if the post is on the game line, it's in
if the post is located outside the game line, it's out.

[Casper]

looks like you lost that rally. Almost all the badminton post that I have play with or see were setup outside the court or right beside the court. So if you are playing single, then definitely you have lost the point by where the post are. Also, I think any interference with the bird beside your racket is a automatic fault, unless specify otherwise (of course beside hitting the top of the net and rolled over the other side).

[goldmedal]

this exact scenario happened to me, but my opponent was adament that it was a fault

[Dill]

Interesting point Neil makes about singles as the posts are clearly outside the boundries of the marked court

For doubles it is not a fault, the posts are considered as part of the net and as the shuttle can hit the net and tumble over it can also hit the post and tumble over as most posts are placed on the doubles lines of the court and as such count as part of the court.

Properly set up posts should never be outside the marked area of play, the outer edge of the post should be at right angles to the outside edge of the doubles line, the inside should be at right angles to the inside of the line.

[dykp83]

hello

Thanks guys for discussing

so i conclude that if the post is on the doubles line (following regulations) and:

-if singles, it is OUT, as the post is outside the court

-if doubles it is IN, as the pole is still on the line (in-court)

I hope this is correct :)

Thanks again

[estib]

hello

Thanks guys for discussing

so i conclude that if the post is on the doubles line (following regulations) and:

-if singles, it is OUT, as the post is outside the court

-if doubles it is IN, as the pole is still on the line (in-court)

I hope this is correct :)

Thanks again

From my understanding, the post is part of the net and if your shot hit the post and went in, it should be called IN regardless whether it's doubles or single.

I think the law 13.2.6 touches any other object or person outside the immediate surroundings of the court refers to objects that are not part of the court like lights, umpire chairs, walls etc.

[Mag]

Quite so. The posts are by definition part of the net.

[dykp83]

hm...the post is part of the net .....makes sense....

so regardless of doubles or singles, its still IN then? ok...

thanks everyone

[dpc1l]

Is this likely to ever happen in singles unless you are hitting a shuttle that is blatantly out, or driving a shuttle which would land way outside the side line? (except for the above example)

[Neil Nicholls]

Quite so. The posts are by definition part of the net.

what about the supports for the post, when present?

[Mag]

That's a trick question: according to Rule 1.4, posts that extend into court are illegal. The Laws of Badminton can't help in cases where the equipment does not apply to the rules, can they? ;)

Don't make things more complicated than they are. If the shuttle hits the floor support after going over the net (however unlikely that is), common sense would say that it's in if the point of impact is on or inside court boundaries, otherwise it should be a fault.

[Neil Nicholls]

That's a trick question: according to Rule 1.4, posts that extend into court are illegal. The Laws of Badminton can't help in cases where the equipment does not apply to the rules, can they? ;)

Don't make things more complicated than they are. If the shuttle hits the floor support after going over the net (however unlikely that is), common sense would say that it's in if the point of impact is on or inside court boundaries, otherwise it should be a fault.

It has happened to me !
Common sense shouldn't have to come in to it. The laws are at fault for being vague. And not just in this area.

and it used to be legal for posts to extend into court
1.4 ... [until 1 August 2004, the limitation on extensions into the court will apply only to IBF sanctioned events]


P.S.
where is it that "The posts are by definition part of the net."

[cooler]

ibf laws only work for equips within ibf standards.

lets have some common sense here.
i had played with posts that is 10 ft high, or extends 2 to 3 feet outside the double lines. I'm certain to say that the shuttle is obvious 'out' in order to hit those posts, even if the shuttle eventually landed 'in', it's really a fault.

[Dill]

Most posts specifically made for badminton are the same thickness as the tape used for marking the lines, that is why they are part of the marked court boundaries. The outside edge of the pole is an extension upwards of the outside line on the doubles court similarly the inside edge of the post is an extension of the inside line of the doubles court.

You do get multi-purpose poles for volleyball and badminton which have eyelets for a badminton net but they are far too tall and extend upwards, they are designed to be outside of the doubles court with their inner edge being an extension of the outside of the doubles line.

Phew that took a while..............hope it makes sense.

[Furqan]

simple, if the poles are inside the court boundries for singles( that is rather impossible, and agianst the rules),or doubles(illegal too) it is in then.if the poles are outside...its out! both for singles and doubles

but isnce kwun says it is in....i think i am wrong.

but no..the clause he posted........is agianst my statements...so maybe its in...but what my common sense tells me..its out

[sjhuk]

All this talk of where the post is is silly!

1.5 The posts shall be placed on the doubles side lines as in Diagram A irrespective of whether singles or doubles is being played.

So if the post isn't where it should be and it affects a rally then a let is surly the only sporting way to sort it?! If the post is where it should be, it is IN. This has come up in a match I've played before and it was ruled in

[Furqan]

All this talk of where the post is is silly!

1.5 The posts shall be placed on the doubles side lines as in Diagram A irrespective of whether singles or doubles is being played.

So if the post isn't where it should be and it affects a rally then a let is surly the only sporting way to sort it?! If the post is where it should be, it is IN. This has come up in a match I've played before and it was ruled in

if a post is on doubles side line( this means its outside the surroundings of the singles court....)..its still in u say when shuttle hits it?

rule states "outside the immediate surroundings of the court", im confused about it, if the post is on doubles side line...and singles is being played...and the shuttle hits the post...and comes in..to opponents side...would it be considered "outside" the surroundings of the singles court?? or it would still be in?

[estib]

if a post is on doubles side line( this means its outside the surroundings of the singles court....)..its still in u say when shuttle hits it?

rule states "outside the immediate surroundings of the court", im confused about it, if the post is on doubles side line...and singles is being played...and the shuttle hits the post...and comes in..to opponents side...would it be considered "outside" the surroundings of the singles court?? or it would still be in?

If you hit the post in singles and the shuttle fall towards your opponent side, the shuttle is still in play. (Law 15.2). The argument is that the pole is outside surrrounding of the court and should be a fault. But if you refer to (Law 1.5) it states that the post should be place on the doubles sidelines regardless of singles or doubles. Meaning the post is part of the court not considered outside the court surrounding otherwise they would have specified that the post be move for single match or the single sidelines be indicated. As for non-comforming post it cleary stated in appendix 1 that sideline be inidicated either by a post or strip of material, and be placed on the double sidelines refering to law 1.5.

A shuttle is not in play when
15.2 it strikes the net or post and starts to fall towards the surface of the court on the striker's side of the net;

1.5 The post shall be placed on the doubles side lines as in Diagram A irrespective of whether singles or doubles is being played.

Appendix 1
Variations in court and equipment
1. Where it is not practicable to have posts on the sidelines, some method shall be used to indicated the position of the sidelines where they pass under the net, eg by the use of this post or strips of material 40 mm wide, fixed to the side lines and rising vertically to the net cord.

[redkingjoe]

Sorry guys. Please accept my apology. This is my first and may be last time of doing for hijacking:

Your thread reminds me of the "In N Out" Burger in California, the best in the World, so tasty.

Sorry

[Furqan]

thanks estib!. you clarified it for me. :rolleyes: