View Poll Results: Is Joaquim Fischer service illegal?
- 55. You may not vote on this poll
11-27-2011, 03:54 PM #18
You guys are on drugs. There's no way Fischer will EVER get pulled up on that serve. EVER.Aside from the fact that it's barely noticeable, it's part of his natural service action that he uses for every serve, so it's not malicious or a deceptive technique.After watching almost every broadcast game in recent history, I'd be more concerned with players serving above their waist, because there are a lot of players pushing the friendship in that aspect.
11-27-2011, 04:12 PM #19
^^ True. There is no deception. He does this on every single serve.
However, the service and preparation prior to it on both the server and receiver has become like a cat and mouse game in the past 2 years. With hand raising indicating non preparation till the very last second amongst the Chinese players, excessive hand patting between partners a la BoMo, these delay tactics are getting tiresome.
11-27-2011, 04:29 PM #20
Yeah they are getting tiresome, but Fischer/Pedersen are not big offenders there even. It would be good if the Umpires showed more authority I think, but it should be solely to improve the flow of the game rather than to be pedantic with the rules. If people are persistent with their serves and they're not flaunting the rules to gain advantage, then no harm no foul. Simple as that.
11-27-2011, 04:29 PM #21
If a very tiny junior girl serves slightly above her waist I think it is less problem than a double action serve imop. I have not studied his action when flick-serving, but I assume it could make the flick more deceptive.
11-27-2011, 04:42 PM #22
You're clearly one of those literalists who have forgotten the reason for the rules in the first place. :-P The rules are the first and foremost to provide an even playing field for all players, so if there is no unfair advantage in any action, then the spirit of the game is still in tact. THAT'S by far the most important issue. Rules are written by people, and people are not infallible, and rules are not inalienable, so in light of that there is no real issue here.
11-27-2011, 04:56 PM #23
If there was such an "advantage" you'd think one of their opponents would have complained about it by now . It looks more like a habit picked up as a youngster in taking aim before striking ...
11-27-2011, 05:02 PM #24
11-27-2011, 05:21 PM #25
I actually can't believe we're on page 2 discussing this. I think there's more of an issue with people's prejudices actually thinking Fischer is doing anything wrong, rather than the actual 'offence'.
11-27-2011, 05:23 PM #26
11-27-2011, 06:52 PM #27
I dunno, how much of a 'double movement' do you think constitutes a deceptive technique. 5mm? 50mm? It can't be absolutely no movement at all, because not only is it physically impossible, you'd have the fault most players. I mean, sometimes I do a double movement where I start to swing fast (I serve forehand in singles) as if doing a high serve but slow down at the very last minute to do a low serve. I guess this is technically a double movement too, but I don't see it any different to doing a deceptive drop shot.
None of this is really covered in the rules, is it?
The rule should read something like "during the serve, the racket can only be moved in a backwards movement once, unless said movement is a natural part of a players serve and not used for deliberate deception."
Last edited by Maklike Tier; 11-27-2011 at 06:55 PM.
11-28-2011, 11:26 PM #28
My take on this:
If the players or their coaches from any opposing team were convinced his serve was illegal, I'd be very surprised if not one of them had officially complained to the tournament referee or other BWF officials. I've watched quite a few of his games over time, and as Maklike and others have pointed out, his serve is consistent in style. It's almost like he first kinda "takes aim" to make sure he has the correct swing path, and then backswings to begin the serve. Every time.
So, why have the officials not cautioned, warned or stopped him cold if this were an illegal serve? Officials are not required to act only if they receive complaints. They act if there is a violation, plain and simple. But even (just as an example, before some of you go ballistic ) in events played in China, with all-Chinese court officials at times, no one has ever faulted or warned him if he were in violation. I'd be interested in knowing why.
11-29-2011, 11:38 AM #29
9.2 Once the players are ready for the service, the first forward movement of the server's racket head shall be the start of the service.
I don't agree that these rules are impossible. I think most pros abide by these rules.. I don't think that Joachims serve is strictly legal by the book though..
I think it is irrellevant if it is deceptive or not. I have seen service judges called single-services just made to put the shuttle into play that where a few cm to high or, racket pointing upwards, regardless if it was deceptive or just a very easy serve to receive.
I have seen small thai/jap girls get called on high services that where very low compared to the tall danish opponents etc.. So I think most of the time the rules are not "interpreted" by service judges based on the "intents" or "deceptiveness". I do not see why some faults should be passed and some don't.. doesn't really seem fair and stringent imop.
Last edited by twobeer; 11-29-2011 at 11:51 AM.
11-29-2011, 11:48 AM #30
^^ Yep, that's my take on it too. Otherwise why did BWF bother stating the rule. And I don't think they're about to amend the rule to take into account some players who serve like JF. Probably the umpires and players haven't bothered calling him out on his serve yet because there's no malicious or deceptive intent.
11-29-2011, 11:54 AM #31
11-29-2011, 01:36 PM #32
If we match up his serve to the rulebook, it comes up short. And yet, I don't believe the entire worldwide Umpires and service judge community have suddenly fallen in love with Joachim.
11-29-2011, 03:06 PM #33
I didnt even notice it until this stupid thread came along, so I'm not surprised the service judges haven't noticed or bothered with it.
11-29-2011, 05:15 PM #34
Well I have to say that the thread isn't "stupid". It's a legitimate concern which has brought up discussion about the rules and the purpose behind the rules. You say everyone is "on drugs" and the tone of your posts are somewhat confrontational. While I do believe your points about how Fischer's serve is consistent and not deliberately meant to be deceptive, it doesn't follow the rules of how the service is legal. The main point of your counter argument is that as long as the player doesn't mean to deceive the player deliberately, you can serve in a variety of ways even if it violates some of the rules of service in some way or form. It may be part of JF's natural motion, but that doesn't make it any less illegal. Perhaps it's just that the rules need to be updated which I will not argue with, but as long as the current rules are in place, JF's serve is still illegal.
I don't think it really affects the current top competition because they've played him so many times that the serve is normal for them, but mainly it's for newer pairs who have not "experienced" the serve before (though likely they will have watched videos of them playing long before this).
Ultimately the point I'm trying to make is that just because something is accepted and is regularly done doesn't make it necessarily correct. In the end though I also don't think the concern is so groundbreaking that we all need to jump on JF's back on his serve. However he does need to be made to realize that he is pushing the rules a bit far with his serve.
By decoy in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 11: 10-07-2011, 09:54 PM
By sergesa in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 75: 04-09-2007, 11:54 PM
By yoyomonkey in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 7: 07-04-2006, 09:14 AM
By silentlight in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 8: 03-18-2005, 12:39 AM
By Sgt_Strider in forum General ForumReplies: 6: 07-23-2003, 07:18 PM