Thanks for visiting us!

Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.

Click here for a FREE account!

Big error from umpire in ETC semifinal

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by vixter, Feb 16, 2014.

  1. vixter

    vixter Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Germany
    In yesterday's ETC semifinal between Russia and Germany, at 19-19 in the second set, the umpire called a fault on the Russian woman when she was about to serve. She was preparing to serve a low backhand serve. She had completed her takeback of the racket, and then she aborted her service, probably because she was distracted by a motion of the receiver. Now we hear the umpire shouting "FAULT".

    The umpire says nothing more, and the Russian girl is about to start her service again. But the German women obviously heard the umpire say fault, so they walk up to him. The umpire realizes he has to stick with what he said, so he says "service over, 20-19", hereby awarding a very crucial point to the Germans who could go on to take the second set 21-19.

    In the set-break we can hear the service judge discuss with the umpire about his decision, explaining to the umpire that the service rule was not broken (the forward motion of the racket had not started), and we can hear the umpire at first trying to defend his decision (the serve has to be one fluent motion), and then I THINK I heard him saying "ok I guess I was wrong". Am I right in thinking that this was a bad mistake by the umpire? The service only begins upon the first forward-motion of the racket, right?
     
  2. Winex West Can

    Winex West Can Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    2,396
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hi Tech
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    I am guessing that the umpire meant to say "LET" instead of "FAULT". He could have just told the German ladies that he made the mistake and no harm done but instead he gave in (which in my opinion is probably the crucial mistake made).

     
  3. vixter

    vixter Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Germany
    But can a let be called before the point has begun? Lets are called to stop a rally and replay the point. She hadn't served yet.

    I guess it makes sense though, because as an umpire how can you not know the service rules. Maybe you are right, and he just didn't want to admit he called fault instead of let. But it's pretty scandalous either way.

    The Russians won the 3rd set anyway so it didn't affect the outcome of this match. But they might have won in 2 sets and be fresher for today's final.
     
    #3 vixter, Feb 16, 2014
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2014
  4. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    16,250
    Likes Received:
    35
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    I am surprised the umpire calls a service fault when a service judge is there to do that for the umpire.
     
  5. AlanY

    AlanY Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,068
    Likes Received:
    171
    Location:
    England
    that follow on discussion on the other thread re. video replays.
    should players/coaches allow to challenge umpire decision with video replay?
     
  6. Oldhand

    Oldhand Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    120
    Occupation:
    Broadcast Systems Integration
    Location:
    Asia
    Um, you cannot have a service fault before the shuttle is served.
    I'm surprised the Russians didn't ask to see the chief referee.
     
  7. AlanY

    AlanY Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,068
    Likes Received:
    171
    Location:
    England
    if i'm concentrating on my serve and heard something from the umpire's desk I would assume it's a 'let' as well.
     
  8. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    UK
    I have not seen it as streaming was not available here, but the call is legitimate enough. Aborting a serve because of distraction before you start your back swing is fair enough, but to abort after back swing is just games and should be faulted.(unless a foreign object fell on the court or something)

    9.1.1 neither side shall cause undue delay to the delivery of the service once the server and the
    receiver are ready for the service. On completion of the backward movement of server’s
    racket head, any delay in the start of the service (Law 9.2), shall be considered to be an undue
    delay;
     
  9. demolidor

    demolidor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    10,557
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    @Hollanti
    If the destraction is the receiver moving is it not fault receiver?
     
  10. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    UK
    The receiver Does not have to be deadly still. As long as one part of both feet remains in constant contact with the ground. Was the German girl waving or pulling faces or something? You can't just decide you are distracted at every little movement. You may get away with it before a takeback but not after.
    If I was allowed to cancel serves after any takeback I could use this as a severe tactical advantage.
     
  11. demolidor

    demolidor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    10,557
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    @Hollanti
    Well probably depended on what happened, I just had the fault receiver call in my head that actually happened in one of the MD matches.
    Sounds like the server got caught out by a legal motion which would make it a correct call.
     
  12. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    UK
    strangely enough if the umpire did say this - "we can hear the umpire at first trying to defend his decision
    "(the serve has to be one fluent motion)". "
    Then the umpire was wrong about his statement because the service had not started, but luckily he had called a fault correctly anyways, because that is an undue delay fault as stated in 9.1.1
    My feeling is the umpire knew the rule but did not express himself properly when challenged by the service judge at the interval.
     
  13. vixter

    vixter Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Germany
    I think you are completely right. Now I understand the umpire calling a fault, because it was an undue delay. Birgit Michels wasn't doing anything particularly distracting. So the call was warranted, the umpire just didn't refer to the right rule when explaining his decision.

    This makes sense to me now because after all, there was no protests from the Russian coaches. So I stand corrected, the call wasn't scandalous at all.
     
  14. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,052
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    United States
    Undue delay would be the call. It would be an umpire's decision to call undue delay of service (not the service judge).

    Ma Jin was called on it once at match point by the umpire and Gillian Clark was arguing about what the umpire was doing, and that it should be the service judge's call (which is incorrect).

    Anyways, if the umpire made a mistake, he should've apologized if he recognized it pretty instantly he made the wrong call. I guess there would be arguments and stuff, but I would've apologized and said I made a mistake (this wasn't a rally, this was before too). Humans make mistakes sometimes.
     
  15. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    UK
    On a side note. I did find the umpires at the ETC rather strange.

    One umpire got so excited he made some sort of chicken noise mid rally 24m28s to 24m30s
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cleTr-1yxFA

    There was also a WD match involving Corrales & Marin V German i think. The umpire seemed to take a dislike to the Spanish girls and on a few occasions after their opponents killed the shuttle he shouted out yess! Then called the score. It was quite bizarre.
     
  16. vixter

    vixter Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Germany
    ^LOLOLOL whyyy umpire is a chicken in disguise :D:crying:
     
  17. drmchsraj

    drmchsraj Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    Messages:
    314
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    local to the coast
    does anyone have video?
     
  18. scorpion1

    scorpion1 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    5,748
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    Exciting one
    Location:
    India
    It seems like you are concentrating more on umpire's actions than the match... Just kidding..:D
     
  19. raymond

    raymond Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,111
    Likes Received:
    17
    Occupation:
    Top Secret
    Location:
    USA
    Off-topic here. What do you think of low serves of Danish player Christinna Pedersen. She also does this forward movement as preparatory move.
     
  20. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    13,513
    Likes Received:
    260
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    She's fine. It's only a preparation as you said, not part of her stroke.

    But her partner Fisher, that's another different story. His so called preparation seems to be part of the stroke.

    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/for...Joaquim-Fischer-s-double-action-serve-illegal
     

Share This Page