Towel Break

**a|extan** · 08-23-2011, 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by BaoQingWang

pcll99, not at all, i supposed this forum let us learn something new together :-)

alextan, not on the tv :-) but we did raise this question to a senior and experienced umpire, the answer is yes. during interval 1 or 2 minutes, player could go for toilet break BUT must be back on time.
i supposed if the player is not back by the end of interval, a card might be flying :-)
for big events (international standard), player will need to pay fine for card(s) she/he received during the match(es)
from own experience, whenever we are playing sports (badminton,etc) the body will adjust and stop any 'leakage'. I guest that is adrenalin!!!

ok... i guess for pee should be ok...for guys in 1 min..... but if for big business... i presume its hard to finish in 1 min.....
lolz...

**pcll99** · 08-23-2011, 04:05 AM

AlanY, no one like TV commercials... but if TV commercials would help badminton financially, it's an idea for BWF to think about...

If we run 60- or 120-second break if there is a deuce at 20, then I am sure

(1) the players would perform better for the next few minutes
(2) TV could run commercials...

the above two factors above combined together are worth it...

**Mr. Fault** · 08-26-2011, 02:44 PM

Good evening.

I like this discussion.

I too heard Morten Frost's comment and he was quite correct that it was Lin Dan who requested the 'towel-break'.

As the umpire involved I was surprised that Lin Dan had asked for the break. I like to put myself in the Player's shoes and if it were me and I had finally got the decisive advantage in the match I would have wanted to press on.

For this reason alone, I allowed the 'towel-break'. If Lee Chong Wei had requested the break I would have refused on the grounds that he would have being do so with the intention of trying to break his opponent's momentum.

So, I both agree and disagree with Morten's point. He definitely knows better than I but I am not not sure how Lin Dan gets an advantage by breaking his own momentum.

The essence of allowing or not allowing a break is to do so with a feeling for the Match. Either player could equally have asked to have the court mopped and this would have created a break too.

Mr Fault

***kwun*** · 08-26-2011, 03:05 PM

Cormac!!!!

excellent umpiring, you made a few really decisive and correct calls, esp overruling the one down the line on LD's side which was incorrectly called by the lineman (and subsequently confirmed so on TV replay). i felt that you gave an authoritative, no non-sense presence up there on the umpire seat. keeping both players in their good behavior, neither of them dared to challenge your calls throughout the game.

while it will be forever controversial, i think the match point towel break call is a neutral one. it is unclear to me whether LD will be able to gain any more from the break given that he has the momentum going from 20-21 to 22-21.

i agree with your analysis and trust that you have made the right decision on that call, given that you were closest to the action and has the best feel for the player's intentions. Morten's objections may or may not be correct, but what we know that Morten was for sure on LCW's side as he has show he is quite proud of his prodigy and probably has overlooked the issue with momentum. as i said, it was a neutral call.

honor to have your presence among us BC'ers.

***kwun*** · 08-26-2011, 03:22 PM

another good call was LD's net kill which was contacted over the other side of the net. it was very very close call but also confirmed on TV replay to be a fault.

**AlanY** · 08-26-2011, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Mr. Fault

Good evening.

I like this discussion.

I too heard Morten Frost's comment and he was quite correct that it was Lin Dan who requested the 'towel-break'.

As the umpire involved I was surprised that Lin Dan had asked for the break. I like to put myself in the Player's shoes and if it were me and I had finally got the decisive advantage in the match I would have wanted to press on.

For this reason alone, I allowed the 'towel-break'. If Lee Chong Wei had requested the break I would have refused on the grounds that he would have being do so with the intention of trying to break his opponent's momentum.

So, I both agree and disagree with Morten's point. He definitely knows better than I but I am not not sure how Lin Dan gets an advantage by breaking his own momentum.

The essence of allowing or not allowing a break is to do so with a feeling for the Match. Either player could equally have asked to have the court mopped and this would have created a break too.

Mr Fault

Originally Posted by AlanY

yes, they are very important and were in their mind during the game.
LD was so clever that at 22-21 game 3, he asked for a towel break and the umpire allowed it (M Frost the old fox seen through it though).
LD just let LCW had time to think about all the game/match points he missed and LD got his first and the second is coming!

Good evening Mr Fault,

I posted that in the other threat earlier regarding the same subject.
Any mileages in there?

**chris-ccc** · 08-26-2011, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by AlanY

never like the TV breaks myself. if during the break coaching is allowed i rather have a look of the coach's body language.
at the moment with breaks at 11 points, sometime its already too late for advice if you're 5-6 points behind.

.
But correct me if I am wrong; Currently, Badminton coaches are able to communicate/coach players even when not at any breaks.

This is different from Tennis, where players are not allowed to communicate with their coaches at all (during a match).
.

**Mr. Fault** · 08-26-2011, 04:42 PM

Originally Posted by AlanY

Good evening Mr Fault,

I posted that in the other threat earlier regarding the same subject.
Any mileages in there?

If Lin Dan had served into the net after taking the break everyone (myself included) would have said that he made a tactical error by asking for and taking the break.

I would be very interested to get a full understanding of Morten's logic because he has been there but I think that, like most situations on a badminton court, there is no hard and fast rule. The key to surviving in the chair is being flexible.

It is the same situation with penalties in soccer - do you take a short run-up or a long one. If it goes in then you 'obviously' made the right decision.

At the time I felt that it was fair to allow the break. I did not think that it was a smart call on Lin Dan's behalf. Morten is right when he said that" play should be continuous" and it had been for quite a while. The match had turned into a duel and it was a case of swapping point for point. A break was due and this just happened to be it.

Kwun is also right. It was a 50/50 decision. If Lee asked the answer would have been no. Beyond that point the umpire can only be fair to both sides.

Glad you all enjoyed the great match - I think that I am still shaking!

Let me have a look at the other issue now.

Cormac (Mr. Fault)

***kwun*** · 08-26-2011, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Mr. Fault

Glad you all enjoyed the great match - I think that I am still shaking!
...
Cormac (Mr. Fault)

i am surprised you didn't fall off that high chair during that nailbiting match! i fell off mine a few times during the early hours here in California and must have woken up a few neighbors as well!

**BaoQingWang** · 08-27-2011, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by Mr. Fault

Good evening.

I like this discussion.

I too heard Morten Frost's comment and he was quite correct that it was Lin Dan who requested the 'towel-break'.

As the umpire involved I was surprised that Lin Dan had asked for the break. I like to put myself in the Player's shoes and if it were me and I had finally got the decisive advantage in the match I would have wanted to press on.

For this reason alone, I allowed the 'towel-break'. If Lee Chong Wei had requested the break I would have refused on the grounds that he would have being do so with the intention of trying to break his opponent's momentum.

So, I both agree and disagree with Morten's point. He definitely knows better than I but I am not not sure how Lin Dan gets an advantage by breaking his own momentum.

The essence of allowing or not allowing a break is to do so with a feeling for the Match. Either player could equally have asked to have the court mopped and this would have created a break too.

Mr Fault

Hi Mr. Cormac,

great to know you are in this forum too.

with all respect, only one thing that i have to disagree with you that is after 20-all with only one point advantage, especially the new 21 points system, it is hard to say who is breaking whose momentum.
before that, i agree , one gaining point (momentum) might have better position to request for towel break :-)
but that is just my opinion.
Have a nice day!

cheers.

**pcll99** · 08-27-2011, 12:51 AM

Mr. Fault, glad to have you here...

the LCW vs LD in WC2011 is indeed one of the most nailbiting MS matches in the past 5 years... the most nailbiting MS match in the past 5 years, IMHO, was BaoCL vs Lee Hyun-il during Thomas Cup in 2008.... i still remember it vividly to this day... Luo Lan rushed out to give a towel to Bao after the first game had ended.... towel again

... maybe a towel has special meaning to the Chinese team...

the most memorable badminton match (in all category) in the past 5 years was, IMHO, FuHF/CaiYun vs LeeYD/JJS in 2009 WC (MD final) in India... sadly, a match of that intensity appears only once in a blue moon...

**chris-ccc** · 08-27-2011, 01:34 AM

.
I would guess that sooner or later, the Laws of Badminton could include these 2 conditions (for requesting 'towel-break');

1. When the score is levelled, both player shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

2. When the score is not levelled, only the leading player shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

Are these 2 conditions fair enough? Let us discuss.

.

**pcll99** · 08-27-2011, 02:00 AM

chris,

sounds like a good idea.... but what about when a player is sweating like it's pouring rain... and that there is a risk of slippery...

isn't safety the number one factor?

**CantSmashThis** · 08-27-2011, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by chris-ccc

.
I would guess that sooner or later, the Laws of Badminton could include these 2 conditions (for requesting 'towel-break');

1. When the score is levelled, both player shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

2. When the score is not levelled, only the leading player shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

Are these 2 conditions fair enough? Let us discuss.

.

I do not agree with number two. I was umpiring a junior match this past weekend. I had a kid up 16-5, but his opponent did not give up. He stayed focus and started coming back, soon the score was 16-14, and the kid leading requested for a towel break. Seeing that his opponent scored 9 straight points, I denied his request as it seemed like he was trying to take a break and destroy the momentum his opponent was gaining. The kid who had 5 came back and won that game 22-20.

So, as mentioned before, I believe it depends on how the game is going. If there are a lot of long rallies and it's been some time since the last interval, as long as it doesn't feel like it will break the momentum of one side, then I shall allow a towel break. That's my procedure on deciding whether or not to allow such a break when requested.

**chris-ccc** · 08-27-2011, 02:13 AM

Originally Posted by pcll99

chris,

sounds like a good idea.... but what about when a player is sweating like it's pouring rain... and that there is a risk of slippery...

isn't safety the number one factor?

.
Your comment is a good one.

So... We shall add in a 3rd condition (for requesting 'towel-break')

3. When there is dangerous condition arising on court (slippery/wet floor), the umpire shall call a 'towel-break', so that the floor can be mopped dry.

.

**chris-ccc** · 08-27-2011, 02:19 AM

Originally Posted by CantSmashThis

I do not agree with number two. I was umpiring a junior match this past weekend. I had a kid up 16-5, but his opponent did not give up. He stayed focus and started coming back, soon the score was 16-14, and the kid leading requested for a towel break. Seeing that his opponent scored 9 straight points, I denied his request as it seemed like he was trying to take a break and destroy the momentum his opponent was gaining. The kid who had 5 came back and won that game 22-20.

So, as mentioned before, I believe it depends on how the game is going. If there are a lot of long rallies and it's been some time since the last interval, as long as it doesn't feel like it will break the momentum of one side, then I shall allow a towel break. That's my procedure on deciding whether or not to allow such a break when requested.

.
So to solve this problem, Condition No.2 can be amended to;

2. When the score is not levelled, only the leading player, if having the Service, shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

**chris-ccc** · 08-27-2011, 02:27 AM

.
Summarising Post #32 and #33, we have;

1. When the score is levelled, both player shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

2. When the score is not levelled, only the leading player, if having the Service, shall be allowed to request for a 'towel-break'.

3. When there is dangerous condition arising on court (slippery/wet floor), the umpire shall call a 'towel-break', so that the floor can be mopped dry.

I am sure more suggestions will be arriving soon.

.