Separate names with a comma.
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!
Discussion in 'Korea Masters / China Open 2016' started by CLELY, Nov 14, 2016.
US vpn never failed me to open badmintonworld.tv on youtube.
Thanks. After a short visit to Guangzhou I was in Lantau Island recently. Sat in the same cable car as a Batak- Chinese couple. Their teenage son who is a badminton fan told me that like him Johnathan is of mixed Batak-Chinese parentage. Just wonder if it is true.
the challenge is 2 per match
so the japanese pair did not have challenge anymore
why did they challenge?
jill clark says the challenge is 2 per game or 6 per match (or 4 if it is 2 sets)
did they change the rule?
or is that the rule from the beginning?
Well, maybe he has Batak blood in him. As we know Batak people have specific fam surname e.g Ginting, Sinaga, Simanjuntak, etc.
His parents : Andreas Adi Siswa and
Gillian Clark was correct, 2 challs per game.
i've never seen a match that allows more than 2 unsuccesful challenge
show me a match like that
All matches in 2006 have 2 chals per game. Here it is EXPERIMENTAL LAW
To be implemented 1 January 2016:
3.1 A player/pair has two rights to challenge line calls during the duration of each game of the match.
3.3 If the player/pair is deemed to have incorrectly challenged twice then they lose any further right to challenge during the match game.
the japanese pair has 2 incorrect challenge, why did they challenge again?
that's what i mean. 2 incorrect challenge per match. not per game or per set
maybe they just wanted the umpire to overrule the call. they didn't have challenge anymore
That's the old rule, had been changed to 2 challenges per game.
when did it happen?
Just like @gelopisan has posted in post #127, effective Jan 1, 2016
Well, he certainly didn't. And the Japanese players spend the entire break waving their arms in the air to call the referee in. No luck.
Did you notice the service judge, clearly gesturing to the umpire, that a challenge should be made, within the first few seconds. Then he gave up, walked over, and stood by the umpire's chair.
So many people involved here didn't do their jobs properly...
Yes. At Denmark Open I saw Danish umpires in matches involving Danish players. I was surprised that 1st they allow it, but 2nd that the organizers plan it anyway... They risk a lot and gain nothing. Perhaps they do rosters and planning before they know which players advance, but it shouldn't be that difficult to rotate a couple of games, to avoid this conflict of interest. It's a shame, especially for the truly impartial umpire, who may simply get a call wrong for the right reasons. They will look completely stupid in the situation, and speculation will arise.
However, in the given situation in China, I cannot for the love of god understand, why the umpire doesn't call for the referee, CONSIDERING THIS CONFLICT OF INTEREST. I mean, perhaps he should recognize that this might look wrong, and make absolutely sure, that things are according to the regulations, and call in the referee!?
By not doing so, he really puts himself in questionable lighting.
Also the referee cannot have missed this going on for a couple of minutes. I don't believe it.
And the service judge at first signalling to the umpire, then backing him up afterwards, really looks odd.
if you read it, it's still 2 unsuccesful/incorrect challenge per match
maybe i understand it wrongly
show me please a match that allows more than 2 unsuccesful challenge
You're misunderstanding the statement. It says the players have the right to 2 challenges per GAME, not per match.
So let's say Player A made two unsuccessful challenges in G1, he/she will not have any challenges for the remaining of the first game. But when G2 starts, Player A will once again have two more challenges at his/her disposal.
As a non-professional party your ignorance is understandable.
http://system.bwf.website/documents...s of Badminton Appendix 7 - November 2016.pdf
The same cannot be said for the BWF approved umpire in that match.
thank you for the explanation
can you show me the match i ask?
thank you if you can
The link sent is official BWF regulation. Feel free to browse the many official BWF YouTube matches which demonstrate the new rule.
Man, you did not watch any single match this year? We have seen this rule applied at every tourney! you are very stubborn