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!

what is the umpire playing at?

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by amleto, May 5, 2011.

  1. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,765
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
  2. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    13,413
    Likes Received:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    lyd was at fault for delaying and interupting the flow

    both he and jjs were distracted with the game in the next court, then when the server was about to serve, lyd put up his hand to indicate he's not ready yet, then he puts it down and appears ready... and then he puts his hand up again when the serve is delivered.
     
  3. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,014
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    There's only 2 reasons I can find to fault the LYD in that case. Either he is called for a receiver fault because he moved before the service started AND attempted a return, so that does not warrant a let. If he let the bird drop, it would be a let. Like the umpire in the video said, he's not supposed to return the shuttle.

    The other reason I would see is that neither side should cause undue delay to the delivery of the service once the receiver and server are ready. On completion of the backward movement of the server's racket head, and then LYD putting his hand up, is considered an undue delay, which results in a fault.
     
  4. alexh

    alexh Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    After watching the video, I'm very confused. The umpire seems to be saying "you have to leave the shuttle" (the audio isn't good enough for me to be sure). That is, LYD can't claim he wasn't ready, because he played a return. But if that's the case, then the rally is supposed to continue. The server didn't hit the shuttle back, but caught it.

    It would make sense if the fault were for causing undue delay. But the umpire appears to be saying something different.
     
  5. Vicky Chips

    Vicky Chips Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2010
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Vancouver
    If the receiver is not ready, he is not supposed to react to the service.

    "9.4 The server shall not serve before the receiver is ready. However, the receiver shall be considered to have been ready if a return of the service is attempted."

    By returning the shuttle he "attempted" a service return.
     
  6. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    38,211
    Likes Received:
    280
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    LYD if not ready, should have just left the shuttle alone. the fact that he hits the shuttle back to the server indicates to the umpire that he was ready to receive the shuttle.

    players when not ready, should not touch the shuttle and just let it drop.
     
  7. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,014
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    But at that instant, would the rally not continue? I would understand why it would stop, but there is clearly nothing in the rule book that states that because he returned the service, it's a fault. It just states that if he returns it, he is deemed ready, which would mean that the rally would continue.
     
  8. krysser

    krysser Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    @Home
    The umpire is correct, in that if LYD isn't ready he shouldn't return the shuttle but leave it, since he is returning it he must be ready, but at the same time he is indicating with his hand that he isn't ready, therefor rule 13.4.5 comes into play.
    The correct thing for the umpire would be to call a fault on LYD and therefor the point goes to the server.

    13.4.5 deliberately distracts an opponent by any action such as shouting or making gestures

    /Krysser
     
    #8 krysser, May 6, 2011
    Last edited: May 6, 2011
  9. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    13,413
    Likes Received:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Cantsmashthis,

    Agreed. In that case, not only is the umpire wrong, but the tournament referee is also wrong. Not to mention useless.
     
  10. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    38,211
    Likes Received:
    280
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    i think LYD's objection then is, if the rally continues, and his opponent catches the shuttle. then the opponent should lose the rally instead of him.

    but at the same time, Krysser has a point. he could've been ruled to distract the opponent to make him thinks like he is not ready.

    tough call, this one.
     
  11. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    13,413
    Likes Received:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Both LYD and the server were ready to replay a let immediately after in the right court. The server even has a surprised smile wondering how the umpire made his decision.
     
  12. krysser

    krysser Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    @Home
    Yes and in smaller and youth tournaments there would have been a chance that the umpire would have called a let, and told the player that if he/she weren't ready they should not hit the shuttle as a part of teaching the player the rules, but this is a Grand Prix Gold tournament and the players should know better.
    The calling is by the book no question about that.
     
  13. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,014
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    My friend umpire says he would have just called a let. He thinks that the umpire made a mistake in calling it, and the referee had to stick with what has been called.

    I will ask for some feedback on this from other top umpires in America next week at Boston Open. I will relay you guys what they tell me by next week. I really see no reason why LYD should be faulted in this case.
     
  14. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    13,413
    Likes Received:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    ^^
    I looked at the video again carefully, and you'll see that the umpire was looking on all the while the Korean pair was getting distracted by the game in the next court. Then when lyd was preparing to receive, he had his hand up. Then he put his hand down indicating he was ready, and then he changes his mind and put his hand up again. But by this time, the server did not see lyd and was intently looking down on the shuttle and completed his serve.

    So the umpire called fault on lyd for touching the shuttle if he wasn't ready to receive, he could also fault him for undue delay for receiving. As cantsmashthis mentions, being a world pro player, lyd should know the rules already, that you don't attempt to receive if you say you're not ready.
     
  15. 2wheels04

    2wheels04 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Messages:
    154
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Cal Central
    To Let or Not To Let

    I would not go that far as calling useless, just think, if that call was not made, you would not have responded the way you did. Be that as it may, from what happened at 6-all in Game 2, the easiest and least controversial option would have been calling a let.

    Be that as it may, since the let was not called, if I was in the high chair, I must now go by the book and award the point to the yellow team.

    Why? I hear you ask.

    Yellow played a legal shot with his racquet to return the serve, the shuttle came over the net to black (the server) who hit the shuttle and then caught it with his hand. Fault! Service Over, 7-6, Yellow. And then get ready with asbestos vest as Black heats up and explodes. This will be in complete accordance with the laws. The argument Black will have is that he was distracted by Yellow's hand signal, but still served. No matter, he caught the shuttle, thence a fault.

    In the situation of calling "Let" as soon as the shuttle was served, or even as late as the weak return by receiver, I would have called both the server and receiver and instruct them something like, Fellows, Play must be continuous, You Yellow, you must be ready to receive when the server is ready to serve, You Black, you wait for the receiver to be ready. If you have problems, let me know. Okay Chaps, no more of this, get back in position, and play. Something on these lines, it takes about 6 seconds max, unlike the situation that happened on court, where play was delayed from minute 7:11 to 10:00.

    Sometimes, it is in the best interests of the game to take the least controversial option, and there are always options available without being creative.
     
    #15 2wheels04, May 6, 2011
    Last edited: May 6, 2011
  16. alexh

    alexh Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2009
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Adelaide, Australia
    The biggest problem I have with this is that the umpire doesn't even call a fault. He just calls the score as 7-6. If he's faulting LYD for causing a delay or for distracting the server, then he should be saying the word "fault" as soon as LYD's hand comes up the second time. The way it happened, it's really unclear why the umpire is awarding a point to the server.
     
  17. krysser

    krysser Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    @Home
    Hmm yes yellow played a legal shot with his racket, but distracted black when he signaled his wasn't ready, and thereby breaking rule 13.4.5.
    I agree that the umpire should have called "fault" on yellow for breaking this rule.
    It is no excuse not knowing the rules as a player at that level.

    BTW I think the umpire is actually a BWF certified umpire and have umpired all major tournaments even the Olympics as far as I remember.

    /Krysser
     
  18. druss

    druss Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2009
    Messages:
    1,518
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    I'm of the opinion that as soon as LYD played the shuttle back then it should have continued on in a normal rally. Yes, the rule states that if you're not ready it's a let, but if you attempt or actually return it then it's "game on". The server caught the shuttle clearly expecting a let to be called.

    Yes, the umpire says "you have to leave the shuttle" and if LYD was arguing that he wasn't ready then the umpire is correct. On the other hand, as soon as he DID return the shuttle the point should have continued, in that case the server should have been at fault.

    If LYD was causing a delay then it should have been called a FAULT as a delay. Or if he distracted the server then again the umpire should have called FAULT.

    In the end, none of the above happened, the umpire decided to award the point to the serving team with no justification IMO.
     
  19. CantSmashThis

    CantSmashThis Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,014
    Likes Received:
    1
    Occupation:
    PanAm Umpire
    Location:
    California, United States
    As promised, I brought this topic up to some of the top US umpires. They claimed that in that case, a let should have been played no matter what. The only reasoning we could come up with on why he faulted LYD from his expression of "Lee, next time you have to let the bird drop" would be a fault for distraction. All umpires agreed it should have been a let and gone on from there.

    Depending on how you would interpret what happened, it could have been a fault to any side, which should automatically be resolved with a let.
     
  20. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    13,413
    Likes Received:
    231
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    ^^
    Did those umpires manage to view the youtube video?

    IMO, LYD is at fault for being ready and then changing his mind and putting up his hand to indicate he's not ready, just at the moment the server started to serve. This would be a distraction and unnecessary delay.
     

Share This Page