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!

hitting the the net with my racket but very late, do they get the point?

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by ralphz, Dec 6, 2016.

  1. ralphz

    ralphz Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    london
    I know my title is really unclear.. i'll clarify.

    This sounds very odd.. But my eyesight or brain is somewhat flawed, such that on two occasions recently, i've not been sure whether the shuttlecock is dropping on my side of the net, or the opponent's side of the net.

    So the shuttlecock has gone high, and is coming down on one side or the other. And it's not clear to me until it is under the net tape, which side it is going to come down onto.

    So I run towards the net and towards the shuttlecock. And once the shuttlecock has reached below the net tape, after a mad dash and a tight to the net shuttlecock sinking towards the floor, my eyes or brain thinks it might be on my side of the net. For some reason I haven't figured out that it's on their side when it is sometimes. So let's say the shuttlecock drops tight to the net on their side of the net, But I haven't seen that and I think it is dropping on my side of the net.

    So I do a motion with my racket of lifting what I think is the shuttlecock ,but it brushes the net. My racket hits the net. Their shuttlecock cannot go over the net. Is it a fowl? Do they get the point?

    It has happened on two occasions.. One time our side took the point. The other time our opponent's insisted it was their point though our side thought it was really silly that they'd be taking the point, since the shuttlecock was on their side of the net due to their shot and me brushing the net late had nothing to do with their shot not making it over. Sometimes i've even ended up hitting te shuttlecock through the net like my racket touching the net touching the shuttlecock while the shuttlecock is on their side but long after their shuttlecock has not gone over and is near the ground.

    Hope i'm being clear and you're not too horrified by my mental or optical glitch. I'm interested to know the rule in that situation.

    Thanks
     
  2. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    18,028
    Likes Received:
    654
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    It's a fault by yourself. You hit the net before the shuttle landed on the ground.
     
    Rob3rt likes this.
  3. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    The important thing in this situation is wether the shuttle is still in play or not. Shuttle is out of play when it touches floor or net. Until than - if you make a fault it's a fault. If in your case shuttle touched the net and it was before you did - than the point is yours, otherwise, you are at fault even if shuttles wouldn't go over the net.
     
    pcll99 likes this.
  4. DarkHiatus

    DarkHiatus Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Messages:
    446
    Likes Received:
    135
    Location:
    Manchester
    Correction: it must hit the floor.

    Whether it hits the net doesn't matter. It can hit the middle of the net, slide up and over the net and it is still in play (this happens regularly on a low, hairpin net shot for example).

    If you touch that net ANY time between the service and the shuttle hitting the floor, whoever hit the net loses a point. Keeps it simple, and means you don't need any extra judgement on whether a shuttle was going to go over the net or not.

    An extreme example of why it must hit the ground is as follows: if in the original example the shuttle was going to hit the middle of the net and your opponent was going to lose the point, he could whack the middle of the net instead to lower it artificially and let the shuttle pass.
     
  5. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    Sorry, that is not correct:
    Ok, if the shuttle goes up the net, than it is not out of play, but we do not discuss this situation here..
     
  6. DarkHiatus

    DarkHiatus Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Messages:
    446
    Likes Received:
    135
    Location:
    Manchester
    Fair. I'm surprised there is even a section to say if it hits the net/post and starts moving towards the strikers side of the net that the shuttle is out of play.

    It makes you wonder what could have happened between the shuttle bouncing off the net/post towards the striker, and hitting the ground to warrant such a rule.

    A particularly hard smash on the net cord, sending it bouncing upwards and tumbling, where the shuttle centre of mass is heading to the striker, but then it tumbles on the net, which pulls it over to the other side due to the head being heavier than the feathers? You'd need some pretty good cameras to tell it was bouncing back to the strikers side before it tumbled and fell on the other side though.
     
  7. Rob3rt

    Rob3rt Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Messages:
    5,385
    Likes Received:
    648
    Location:
    Germany
    Easy. If you hit the net while the shuttle is still in play it's a fault.
     
  8. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    Just to make it clear the rule says that if the shuttle hits the net and start falling on the side of the player who hit it previously - not the other player who touched the net trying to return the shot :eek:.

    The rule is quite simple actually - shuttle out of play when it: 15.1 strikes the net, 15.2 hits the surface of the court or 15.3 a fault or let occurred. These are all the situations that stop the game as should be.

    The 15.1 "shuttle strikes the net" is important, as in judging - it's all about sequence of events. Striking the net is an event that clearly shows that shuttle is not going to go over the net. If shuttle touches the floor is the same. Shuttle not going over the net but still in the air is not an event that is very clear because it still might go over sometimes and it does not have any point in time...
     
    #8 stradrider, Dec 7, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2016
    pcll99 likes this.
  9. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    18,028
    Likes Received:
    654
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    I stand corrected :)
     
  10. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    No, no - you were correct, just missing one small possibility ;)
     
  11. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    That is why the rule say "start falling towards the surface of the court on the striker's side of the net". It will never go up the net if it started falling down, so it's not so difficult to tell. If the shuttle does go over the net than it's a fault of the player who touched the net, no problem there ether.
     
  12. ralphz

    ralphz Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    london
    You wrote
    A)
    The case i'm describing, all players would agree the shuttlecock was falling towards the surface of the court on the strikers's side of the net and would never go up the net. Nevertheless, I understand that I lose a point i.e. they gain a point if my racket touches the net before the shuttle hit the floor? That's what I understand from 'B' but where you wrote 'A' I just wanted to make sure.
     
  13. DarkHiatus

    DarkHiatus Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Messages:
    446
    Likes Received:
    135
    Location:
    Manchester
    I was thinking of a very, very convoluted. Can't think of the right word. But in any case, a scenario that could happen but very very unlikely to.

    Say the smash went straight onto the net cord such that the shuttle rises exactly vertically above the net cord.

    If the shuttle were to now drop, with the point exactly facing down, the shuttle would hit the net cord again and it's would be 50/50 whether it's on the strikers side or not. However, it would still be in play because it's not heading to the striker's side.

    Take the same scenario where the shuttle doesn't fall exactly downward. You can have a scenario where the shuttle is at a 45 degree angle cork facing upwards, and although the cork is pointing to the strikers side, it could easily bounce and end up on the other side. I.e. the shuttle would be considered out of play by the rules, even though it ultimately ended up on the non-striker's side of the court.

    That assumes the corked side is the side that determines whether it's heading towards the strikers side or not.

    My point is that it would be simpler simply not to have rule 15.1, as I believe 15.2 covers it already. Are there any realistic situations you can think of where rule 15.1 would have to be called upon because 15.2 was insufficient?
     
  14. DarkHiatus

    DarkHiatus Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2015
    Messages:
    446
    Likes Received:
    135
    Location:
    Manchester
    Read the full rules - the case where it starts falling towards the strikers side of the net is ONLY after it hits the net or net post previously. Otherwise rule 15.2 is the relevant rule - shuttle is out of play when it hits the surface of the court (and only when it physically touches it).
     
    stradrider likes this.
  15. ralphz

    ralphz Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    london
    I've seen a case where the shuttlecock was struck maybe going on an upwards trend and hit below the net tape, then climbed over and landed on the other side of the net. I've seen it happen more than once. We didn't know the rules but figured that since the non-striker had a chance to get it, it was the striker's point. Though in retrospect maybe the non-striker didn't have a chance to get it without touching the net!
     
  16. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    I would say, in this situation, since shuttle did not fall down after hitting the net but going up - than it still in play. When after that it starts falling clearly on the striker's side - than it is out of play. It is a very rare situation and I think still the rule 15.1 works here.

    In most cases though it just falls down straight after hitting the net. There is no reason to fault the other side for touching the net as the shuttle clearly wasn't going over. No need to dismiss the rule :).
     
  17. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    In this case touching the net is a fault as the shuttle is still in play - it didn't start falling on the striker's side and the person touched the net had still chance to return it. I have seen people returning impossible shuttles without touching the net. it could be a sliced lift or return from below the net, So yes - it it's over the net, it can be returned and touching the net is a fault.
     
  18. ralphz

    ralphz Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    london
    http://www.worldbadminton.com/rules/documents/ibflaws2006a.pdf

    You ask if 15.2 includes 15.1

    It doesn't..

    Surely the situation that demonstrates that, is the case of my original example, but where it touches the net. So i.e., the striker hits the shuttlecock, it stays on his side of the net. touches the net and falls but hasn't yet reached the floor.

    The shuttlecock is now out of play given rule 15.1 and would be in play if 15.1 was not there.

    I then come running like a blind lunatic, thinking the shuttlecock might be on my side of the net.

    I swing my racket, If I hit the net with my racket, then given 15.1, it's still my point. If 15.1 was not there, then i'd have committed a fault, and it'd be their point

     
    stradrider likes this.
  19. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    286
    Likes Received:
    53
    Location:
    Norway
    Well done @ralphz explaining why 15.1 is important! :).

    The updated rules book is located here : http://bwfcorporate.com/regulations/ . Use "Laws of Badminton" link for main badminton rules PDF, but also very important "Recommendations to Technical Officials (RTTO)" file. That is the best place to check most resent rules as in other locations files are not updated and especially a problem can arise if using outdated and therefore incorrect rule numbers...
     
    Cheung likes this.
  20. ralphz

    ralphz Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2016
    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Location:
    london
    Thanks. And re my explanation I couldn't have done it without your earlier explanation!

    Personally I think that given what seems to be the general philosophy behind the rules e.g.

    a rule that if the shuttlecock is on top of the net and stuck there, then it's a let <-- that's fair.

    a rule that if the shuttlecock hits the net,and crawls over the other side and gets stuck then it's a let <-- that's fair

    a rule that if the shuttlecock hits the net and is then falling on the striker's side then the shuttlecock is considered to be not in play <-- that's reasonably fair

    All seem very fair to me.. But looking at the philosophy of the last rule(fairness behind it being that the shuttlecock wasn't going over as it's below the net on his side and going down), surely it should be extended to regardless of whether it first hit the net?

    If the striker hits the shuttlecock and it's below the net on his side and it's going down, then even if it hasn't hit the net on his side, it's clearly not going to start going up.. and every player can agree that the shuttlecock left alone is not going to go over as much as they could agree it wouldn't go over if it had hit the net and done the same thing, gone down. So then I think the rule should ideally say that the shuttlecock should be considered out of play if it is below the net and going down, regardless of if it hit the net. I don't think it's fair that shuttlecock doing that without hitting the net, is considered in play and thus that if a player on the opposing team touches the net that the striking team gets the point. I'd think the rule would be fairer if the shuttlecock was considered to be not in play, in that situation.
     

Share This Page