Results 86 to 102 of 152
05-02-2013, 07:53 PM #86
Do you think the current service calling system even though not accurate for pro's shows more consideration to club than the proposed system? Have you got a solution that would be more usable for club and also accurate for the pro level?
Unfortunately in this case i think the proposed system can only be classed as poor if there is a better solution, not on how many benefit from it.
05-03-2013, 05:28 AM #87
Then again, I have no experience of the proposed system, so I don't want to dismiss it out of hand. The service laws have always been the most awkward part of the rules, so it's good that the BWF is trying to make them work better.
Have you got a solution that would be more usable for club and also accurate for the pro level?
05-03-2013, 08:20 AM #88
How many service faults were actually given at your club/ league last year? for mine zero and their was a lot, so I can inform you the current/old system does not work at all at club level from what I have experienced. That's 2 different leagues and 3 clubs.
Imo I don't think service is a major problem/advantage in the amateur game and if it is, a quiet word should be enough so he/she does not repeat the following week. If that does not work then the guy/girl is just sad. I can see why the pro's push it given there is money involved/ getting an edge and stuff. It needs to be more accurate at pro level.
Last edited by craigandy; 05-03-2013 at 08:23 AM.
05-03-2013, 09:50 AM #89
I'm not playing matches at the moment (injury), but I have often called bad serves in match play. I usually offer a let to sweeten it, as a fault seems harsh given the lack of an objective judge. Nevertheless this usually stops people playing ridiculous drive serves; and often they lose confidence in their serve, which effectively gives me some free points.
I also call serves in club play, but there are circumstances where I let it slide. Some players genuinely struggle to change their serve, even if they accept it's a fault. When you've been serving the same way for 30 years, it's hard to change.
I find that service faults are rare at higher-standard clubs (although this could vary between clubs). So at a "serious" clubnight, I almost never feel the need to call a serve.
My other context is coaching. I feel responsible for warning players if they are making service faults; I also feel I should encourage fair play, especially among juniors. If the proposed rules go through, I'll need to bring a measuring stick to coaching sessions...
I can never quite take off my coaching hat; so even in a "social" club setting, I may try to educate players. I try to stop short of being an unwanted know-it-all. Sometimes I succeed.
In all these contexts, I still dislike calling service faults because of the possibility I am wrong. With the current system I add a small "margin" to ensure that my call is correct. With the proposed system, I would not feel justified making the call at all, having no visible point of reference.
BBEdrummerAK liked this post
05-03-2013, 10:14 AM #90
Fair enough, for coaching you could bring a piece of string in and tie it the length of the net at the appropriate height for player reference, maybe something similar for player umpired matches could be used at clubs too. This obviously would not be suitable at pro level but they will have a judge.
08-15-2013, 02:06 AM #91
Regarding enforceability of this rule, its not hard to just get a tape measure and find out where 110cm is relative to somebody's body when they are in their normal service position, just do it once at the start of the game. Then enforcing the new rule is equivalently difficult to enforcing the old rule, i.e. the reference point is somewhere on the person's body. People's service position wont change much, and the odd cm here or there is well within the error limits.
If you are going to go around with special equipment, then clearly the new rule is easier to enforce since its a fixed height from the ground.
I wonder if in amateur play something similar has always been in effect. Normally nobody bothers to say anything about service height/rules unless you are getting a big advantage from drive serving. Thus if a short person served a bit high nobody really cares, but if a tall person served a bit high and was getting an advantage people would complain. Maybe the tall person was maginally legal under the old rules, but now it will definitely be illegal, and thats a good thing!
From my point of view short serves are ok, flick serves stop rushers/overcommittment and are ok, but driveserves have always seemed a bit unfair, especially since only certain lucky tall people can do them, so you can't "do it back to them". So now driveserves are less effective, all will be well!
08-15-2013, 05:40 AM #92
the server would see the correct height and hopefully there would be less faults
Last edited by randomuser; 08-15-2013 at 05:44 AM.
08-15-2013, 12:44 PM #93
08-16-2013, 03:18 PM #94
I believe last I heard, they were testing possibly a string through the net, but I don't think that will work, because like craigandy said, it's hard to see behind the female sometimes in mixed. As a service judge, you would have to keep adjusting your chair just to see the serve. I call mixed a back breaker when I service judge it since you have to move around and lean to the side and what not.
08-17-2013, 05:50 AM #95
08-18-2013, 05:33 AM #96
You would be moved closer to the court instead of that isolated lonely seat in the corner they usually get, and then just lean to the side and look with using the string. How will it work for mixed, is something they would need to figure out though.
08-18-2013, 01:03 PM #97
Last edited by craigandy; 08-18-2013 at 01:07 PM.
08-18-2013, 06:53 PM #98
What about getting rid of the below the waist rule all together and just have the following rules: the bird must travel in an obvious upward trajectory and the racket must be obviously pointed in a downward direction.
It seems to me the below waist service rule is impossible to enforce with any kind of consistency and people on the club level are already serving just under their chest anyways.
08-18-2013, 08:36 PM #99
yeah because 'obvious(ly)' is not at all subjective and impossible to enforce
craigandy liked this post
08-18-2013, 08:48 PM #100
08-18-2013, 09:35 PM #101
For example: you would have to serve below the top of the net to achieve an upward trajectory and if the flight is close to level or level, than that would be a fault. So the word obvious would force you to serve somewhere at the middle of the net level to keep within the rules. Which I think is better than trying to determine the last rib of someone's body.
08-18-2013, 09:56 PM #102
I don't know how the serves would look like without the waist rule in place, but it feels like some players already serve like their isn't a waist rule now, I think it will takes away the constraint on the people who at the moment serve properly and the advantage of those who don't serve properly.