View Poll Results: Is Joaquim Fischer service illegal?
- 51. You may not vote on this poll
12-08-2011, 06:12 PM #69
To add to this the national team series had a big debate amonst refferres here in Sweden earlier this week on a serve that was faulted for a player in premier team-league here for halting before starting the forward movement in the serve.. referees at the match had different views if the service really should have beem faulted or deemed correct, and no concensus about the rule interpretation was really met.
Last edited by twobeer; 12-08-2011 at 06:14 PM.
12-13-2011, 08:03 AM #70
well, taking the rules literally, the serve is definitely illegal.
so there's two options:
a) change the rules accordingly
b) let the rules unchanged and trust in the referees common sense
my perosnal opinion is that this service shouldn't be called, as he does this serve consistently and EVERY time, exactly the same way. but unfortunately, the rules say something different.
12-13-2011, 09:16 AM #71
You might as well endlessly debate what constitutes "ready" since it is not defined in the rules as well. According to the rules if you never attempt a return you can always be deemed not ready and have them serve over and over again, since there is nothing in the rules that says you have to hold up your hand or something to indicate you are not ready.
If you want to leave "ready" to the discretion of the umpire/service judge then clearly they deem a server to be ready only after addressing the shuttle (and/or making a backward movement in their swing).
Perhaps they should introduce a shotclock in between points of say 10 seconds and add a few timeout opportunities .
I will agree 9.2 does not necesarilly have to come after 9.1.1 (or a so called backward movement) but there is nothing defined in the rules what constitutes "ready" with regards to the server which leaves room for addressing the serve which imo is the server indicating readiness.
I'd still seriously would love to see an experiment with a shotclock though .
Last edited by demolidor; 12-13-2011 at 09:25 AM.
12-13-2011, 09:39 AM #72
Of course logically taking position would seem a more rational explanation or indication of readiness but a receiver can both take position and not be ready apparently by simply holding up their hand or not looking at the server ... So should server be deemed ready instantly whenever the receiver finally indicates he/she is ready to receive?
12-13-2011, 10:54 AM #73
12-13-2011, 03:56 PM #74
I think most people would interpret the current serving rules (if taken litteraly) as it it allowed to slowy adress the shuttle statically) to clearly indicate when the servier is ready to serve after the "aim") and once players are ready initiate the service by moving back the racket head and then immediately move it forward in one fluid motion..
The same question really is if the server retracts the racket and then stops.. Can it be said that the service hasnšt started yet, and only starts when he starts moving the racket forward (ie allowing a pause between retracting and moving forward)..
Last edited by twobeer; 12-13-2011 at 04:05 PM.
12-14-2011, 07:03 PM #75
12-15-2011, 02:10 AM #76
JFN does the same movement ALL THE TIME, so it does not irritate opponents in any way. and he doesn't intend to.
in this case the goal of the rule is fulfilled, even though the rule is broken. so in this case it's definitely an option to THINK about changing the rules. sometimes the rules of sports are changed according to modern needs, e.g. offside in soccer. so changing the rules is not a sacrilege...
personal opinion: analogies involving hitler, rape, murder and such serious things are commonly seen on the internet, but usually misleading and dumb...
12-15-2011, 07:06 AM #77
If you break down JF's serve into portions as in your vid, imo his racket at the start of the first foreward movement is not in position to serve but more on standby so he can quickly bring it in position once the receiver is finally ready (I mean the shuttle is at shaft height). As Cantsmashthis mentioned it is not even a wrist movement and is hardly different from the moving crane action except his racket is not in contact with the shuttle which makes it look much more awkward/unusual. He brings it upwards and forewards with a static arm ...
It's too bad we are stuck with these useless flash videos nowadays. Pain in the ass to work with and slow down to 3fps like I did for the LD serves.
I won't deny it at least looks awkward but won't go as far as calling it definitely illegal according to the rules when it is not even specified what constitutes ready which means it is up to the judgment of the service judge and they deem it to be legal. A pause upon completion of the backward movement however is clearly indicated in the rules to be a fault(?) ...
Last edited by demolidor; 12-15-2011 at 07:10 AM.
12-15-2011, 07:33 AM #78
Let me rewrite that: addressing the shuttle ~= indication for opponent that you are ready to serve (unwritten) and retracting = I'm commencing the sequence. Of course it would be a bit more corteous to leave a little pause in between but this is also not written anywhere and once you have it figured out it is hardly a problem unless you had too much caffeine and will jump at anything .
Last edited by demolidor; 12-15-2011 at 07:41 AM.
12-15-2011, 02:21 PM #79
Now we're just going around in circles. It's becoming (literally) a Fisching expedition, if you understand the context. We've made all the conclusions; we've understood the matter; but because we have really nothing else to do with our valuable time on earth, we're going to chew and shred this topic to an endless series of useless deaths. Along the way we will invite associations with rapists, murderers, genocidal tyrants, cheats, card-sharps, liars, bank robbers, heroes, generals, nuclear scientists, gods, demons, grandmothers, and everybody's neighbour. Sometimes, I wonder why I can't hear myself think!
12-15-2011, 05:09 PM #80
12-15-2011, 05:21 PM #81
12-20-2011, 05:47 AM #82
The main pt is whether what he is against the rule! You could not legalized it just because he did it ALL THE TIME and maybe some of the players get used to it, rite? What about those not familiar with his "style" and play him the first time??? Blame them for not familiar with JFN's usual cross-the-rule habit???!!! Amazing logic...
12-20-2011, 07:03 AM #83
i just said that you could think about changing the rules to some extend.
whatever the new rules would look like! i don't know...
well, everyone (!!!) playing JFN for the first time of course knows what his service looks like!
1. JFN is well known.
2. pros watch videos of their opponents.
but that's not the point.
the point really is:
should the ref tolerate an action that is (literally) against the rules but totally in line with the "idea of the rule" (whatever that is...)
12-20-2011, 07:36 AM #84
12-20-2011, 10:59 PM #85
I agree with cobalt that now this is just going in circles. The rules are not always clear on certain situations, but how high are you going to hold each standard of the rule? There has to be room open on service, unless you want everyone to have exactly the same service and fault those who have a bit of difference on their serves. It's hard to sometimes determine what is "legal" and what is "illegal" by how you interpret things. Everyone has their right to their own opinions on this matter whether people agree with it or not.
If the speed limit says 65 mph on the highway. I am driving 66 mph, do I really deserve that ticket for speeding? Some of you could argue yes and others will argue no. (The law clearly says 65 mph) This is a gray area that people will debate. But like this subject officers will most likely not ticket you for it. As service judges don't fault Fischer on his serve.
By decoy in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 11: 10-07-2011, 10:54 PM
By sergesa in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 75: 04-10-2007, 12:54 AM
By yoyomonkey in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 7: 07-04-2006, 10:14 AM
By silentlight in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 8: 03-18-2005, 01:39 AM
By Sgt_Strider in forum General ForumReplies: 6: 07-23-2003, 08:18 PM