Joaquim Fischer's double action serve illegal?

[twobeer]

I don't know why you are even still bothering:

"9.1 In a correct service:
9.1.1 neither side shall cause undue delay to the delivery of the service once the server and the
receiver are ready for the service. On completion of the backward movement of server’s
racket head, any delay in the start of the service (Law 9.2), shall be considered to be an
undue delay;

Meaning, the normal order of a serve is: (address), pull back, start forward motion (i.e.. 9.2 the "start of the serve") which should be common knowledge (and I more or less mentioned twice already on page 1) but 9.1.1 seems to be conviently left out all the time.

Case dismissed! . And in all your theoretical scenario's you can act receiver not ready



I think you need a better internet connection

Demolidor.. To be specific there isn't actually anything in the rules that states that a player is allowed to adress the shuttle once players are ready for service. I know service judges allows adressing the shuttle.. but a real strict interpretation of the rules would actually prohibit this movement towards the shuttles when players are ready, as that first forward racket-movement would "start the service"..

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.


/T

[|_Footwork_|]

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.
interesting case!!

[demolidor]

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 .

[demolidor]

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?

[Badmintan]

Maybe BWF should issue the Joachim Fischer Rule.

Kinda of like the infamous Sean Avery Rule in the NHL.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec_2oKWe2Gw

[twobeer]

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?

I think the most logical interpretation of the rules is that the server is reday when he initiates the service movement by retracting the racket. Clearly indicating to the opponent that the serve is about to start. There isn't really anything written about "adressing the shuttle" so I think any adressing has to be done very slow and before indicating readiness to start the service. Any other interpretation is illogical imop, even if I think it may be reasonable not to call JFs service... But interpreting the "ready to serve" as it only applies for the last movement, then you could really argue that JF for example could adress the shuttle 3 times in a very rapid fashion also before the final stroke (starting the service).. Which I think NO servicejudge or opponent would accept!!

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 hasnät started yet, and only starts when he starts moving the racket forward (ie allowing a pause between retracting and moving forward)..

[Jonc108]

well, taking the rules literally, the serve is definitely illegal.so there's two options:a) change the rules accordinglyb) let the rules unchanged and trust in the referees common sensemy 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.interesting case!!

Now I learn a new logic:1. If a thief or raper commits the same crime consistently everyday and did not get caught, then his behavior is not illegal; and2. Since he does it consistently everyday, pls don't disturb his natural living style!!!3. Therefore the law must be changed to let this guy live in this way 'naturally'..Good!

[|_Footwork_|]

Now I learn a new logic:1. If a thief or raper commits the same crime consistently everyday and did not get caught, then his behavior is not illegal; and2. Since he does it consistently everyday, pls don't disturb his natural living style!!!3. Therefore the law must be changed to let this guy live in this way 'naturally'..Good!

well, the case is somewhat different. the goal of the rule is not to distract the opponents and not to allow too much variation in service styles, right?
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...

[demolidor]

I think the most logical interpretation of the rules is that the server is reday when he initiates the service movement by retracting the racket. Clearly indicating to the opponent that the serve is about to start. There isn't really anything written about "adressing the shuttle" so I think any adressing has to be done very slow and before indicating readiness to start the service. Any other interpretation is illogical imop, even if I think it may be reasonable not to call JFs service... But interpreting the "ready to serve" as it only applies for the last movement, then you could really argue that JF for example could adress the shuttle 3 times in a very rapid fashion also before the final stroke (starting the service).. Which I think NO servicejudge or opponent would accept!!

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 hasnät started yet, and only starts when he starts moving the racket forward (ie allowing a pause between retracting and moving forward)..

I agree with you that retracting the racket prety much = ready (in fact I thought that was more or less the rule; see post #2 ). It is pretty clear in the rules that there can be no delay in foreward movement upon completion of the backward action. So if you have "addressed" the shuttle once and you start a backwards motion the serve has to follow? Which doesn't allow room for multiple times addressing anyway ... which is why Lin Dan's 2nd serve was called a fault for double movement and his first was not (he more or less is addressing the shuttle twice in the 2nd serve).
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(?) ...

[demolidor]

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 .

[cobalt]

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!

[twobeer]

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!

Don't give in to your dark passenger

[twobeer]

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 .

The problem I think is that nothing is written about any allowance for adressing the shuttle in the first place once players are ready, or to define "ready".. Which I think is unfortunate to not be able to precisely specify these things in the rules. I think it should really not be to difficult to write the service rules so that they are less open for different interpretations. I think for example that "players ready for serve" should be defined more precise in the rules.

[Jonc108]

well, the case is somewhat different. the goal of the rule is not to distract the opponents and not to allow too much variation in service styles, right?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...

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...

[|_Footwork_|]

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...)

[ghoster4u]

seems illegal to me...

Illegal for me to.

Maybe those that are fine with this serve coz fisher had not yet get an easy point from this illegal serve. so it seems fine, but when he does that when everything change.

[CantSmashThis]

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.