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!

Change hand when playing

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by wakin75x, Nov 13, 2012.

  1. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,762
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    vittinghus vs lcw iirc.
     
  2. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,762
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    [video=youtube;sXxAXXPEQJk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXxAXXPEQJk[/video]
     
  3. nokh88

    nokh88 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2009
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    138
    Occupation:
    Badminton Trainee
    Location:
    Badminton Academy
    Therefore, can LCW stop to play the final shot and say that Vittinghus distracted him?
     
  4. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,762
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    LCW can try. Whether the umpire agrees that LCW can be distracted from back/midcourt is another thing.

    And in this case, the umpire should have called fault earlier because vittinghus headbutts the net!
     
  5. Fidget

    Fidget Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    3,278
    Likes Received:
    31
    Occupation:
    something far too busy for my badminton needs
    Location:
    Canada
    Somewhat distracting for sure, but not illegally interfering with LCW's shot a-way in the back court.

    I can't believe LCW could complete that last shot, considering he should have been laughing his butt off. :)
    He laughed more on this occasion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VlKbPK9X4gQ
     
  6. alexh

    alexh Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    Probably neither LCW nor the umpire wanted to stop the point--they were hoping to get a fourth dive out of Vittinguis ;-)

    Thanks for posting this clip!
     
  7. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    Yes, the shot is away from LCW, but it is considered distracting if it catches your attention, then you can claim you were hesitant to make your next shot since that short second it caught your attention, it messed up your timing. So you can argue for your point in that scenario. (I think it'd be more towards your favor if you didn't return the next shot and tell the umpire you were distracted compared to you messed up the shot and then go up to the umpire and claim you were distracted)
     
  8. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    Of course I tell you this, but I think the integrity of it all is not to do it. Just saying it can be done, but that's just taking advantage of loop holes in the rules. I'm not condoning this matter, just putting it out there :p
     
  9. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,360
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    UK
    What part could you argue distracted you? It was just a dive, he came under the net which he is entitled to if opponent don't need that space. I think you would be a crap umpire to agree that a simple dive is distracting. Distractions have to be more deliberate like shouting when opponent goes to hit shot, or waving your racket about when they play net shot or other deliberate moves. Could you apply/argue rule (13.4.5 deliberately distracts an opponent by any action such as shouting or making gestures) if he dives anywhere else on his own side. I don't think so. If you were allowed to be automatically distracted by folk invading your court then none of the invading rules would be legal, as standard.
     
  10. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,013
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    No, because that rule specifically states "shouting or making gestures", which I don't categorize diving under. While the other rule states "13.4.3 invades an opponent’s court under the net with racket or person such that an opponent is obstructed or distracted"

    So from what you're saying, it'd be impossible to distract just by going under the net correct? Since he's neither shouting nor making gestures. Why did they include distracting into that specific rule then? Why not just leave it as obstruct? From what you are saying, there is no way you can be distracted from just going under the net unless they do something more deliberate, which is already covered by the other rule, regardless of where the opponent is on the court.
     
  11. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,360
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    UK
    That's almost exactly what i think. Except i still think you can distract coming through if you are close enough to the player yet not obstructing so worth stating it in rule. The player maybe worried about if guy is not going to stop before hitting him or the shuttle and therefore takes his eye of the shuttle, then i reckon he can protest. If there is distance like in the LCW v HKV then no chance.
     
  12. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,360
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    UK
    Incorrect it says "such as" not specifically.
     
  13. gundamzaku

    gundamzaku Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    working professional
    Location:
    Santa Clara County, California, USA
    just played with someone who can use either hand to play, it was more awkward for his partner since his reach is so wide with both sides being his forehand. it was very intersting that for us, all we needed to do was to drive the shots where the flight of the shuttle was flat and quick, that gives him less time to decide which hand to use. more so than not, we usually catch him doing a backhand which is weak because he'd always tried to practice with a forehand instead. very interesting game i must say.
     
  14. Pakito

    Pakito Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,229
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    service consultant
    Location:
    Ipoh
    Would you be so kind to upload the video of this double-forehanded player and give the link pls..
     
  15. gundamzaku

    gundamzaku Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    working professional
    Location:
    Santa Clara County, California, USA
    sorry, there isn't a video available to begin with, so i don't have it :(
     
  16. gundamzaku

    gundamzaku Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,553
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    working professional
    Location:
    Santa Clara County, California, USA
    just play with another guy who can use both hands to hit, except his non dominant hand isn't as good as his dominate hand. which makes me wonder, are there any rules against holding more than one racket per player at a time?

    i mean, we just saw ZYL grab a new racket for ZN in the mixed doubles in the Korea Open, so for a moment on court ZYL did have two rackets on her.......
     
  17. ronaldindin

    ronaldindin Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2013
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    pj
    what if mixed doubles player the girl standing in front the net and stepping on line while her partner do the serving?
     
  18. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,360
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    UK
    It is fine. Here is the rule

    In doubles, during the delivery of service (Law 9.2, 9.3), the partners may take up any positions
    within their respective courts(that means side btw), which do not unsight the opposing server or receiver.
     

Share This Page