11-24-2013, 05:43 AM #1
Shuttlecock from other fields flies in your field.
So when playing it sometimes happens that the shuttle from a different field enters our field. If that happens, is it allowed to interrupt the play and if yes by whom?
In a league game (without umpire) that happened and the 2nd shuttle landed on my oppenents side. I interrupted the game and my oppenent said only he is allowed to interrupt the game, because the shuttle landed on his side.
Form my point of view it doesn't matter where the shuttle is landing. It is a clear distraction to me and I should be able to interrupt the game. Couldn't find any rules that confirm opinion.
11-24-2013, 07:03 PM #2
14.1 ‘Let’ shall be called by the umpire, or by a player (if there is no umpire), to halt play
14.2 It shall be a ‘let”, if:
14.2.7 any unforeseen or accidental situation has occurred.
Rules say by a player not a specific player just any player, so there it is covered by the rules.
Guy was being an complete idiot, maybe next time you can stay quiet and he will slip on it and break his leg
11-24-2013, 11:25 PM #3
Your opponent doesn't have the right to say that to you because sometimes, a foreign object may land on their side of the court and only you or your partner could've seen that. Had you not have stopped the play, they might have injured themselves so they should be thanking you instead.
11-25-2013, 06:09 AM #4
Any sides can interrupt it. You are doing the right thing here
11-26-2013, 11:48 AM #5
11-27-2013, 11:52 AM #6
The only case where this might be potentially irritating to your opponent is if the shuttle flies into their rear court as they are playing a net kill/ clearly about to win the point. They could argue that the shuttle flying into their rear court had no impact on the outcome of the rally as they were about to win the point anyway (such as the opponent hitting the shuttle on a course out the court when the let is called).
During the course of a normal rally then either side can call it although again depending on who thinks they are in charge of the rally they might complain a bit.
I have been in a few situations where the opponent will call a let if the rally is not going their way for whatever reason (undone shoe lace, the light flickering, shuttle breaking/ slowing down a lot) but complain no end when you call a let for them serving when you were still walking towards the service box. But that's another problem :-p
12-05-2013, 12:07 PM #7
Here's your opportunity to take a lead in matters of safety - make those house-rules. This way, everyone knows what happens, and you dont waste time in conferences especially when court-time and availability is at a premium.
Ask this the next time such a situation arise: Should we continue to play and then let you roll off the shuttle? Or have you hit the fellow who came to retrieve his/her shuttle? What is more important - winning that rally, or going home safe?
In a club-game, with no umpire or any other person, opponent safety is more critical than distraction. Probably best to focus on this aspect than any rules or letter of the laws of the game.
12-05-2013, 06:38 PM #8
12-09-2013, 03:00 AM #9
12-09-2013, 03:04 AM #10
12-09-2013, 07:29 PM #11
Section 2 of the Laws, see 3.5 of the recommendations to technical officials:
3.5.2 A shuttle invading from an adjacent court shall not automatically be considered a “let”. A “let” shall not be called if, in the opinion of the umpire, such invasion:
18.104.22.168 has gone unnoticed by the players; or
22.214.171.124 has not obstructed or distracted the players.
One of the ways for a player to gain a tiniest bit of advantage is to influence the umpire. One of the things that an umpire does is to calmly and clearly explain the basis of his/her action, whichever way is the most effective. In this case, it could be something on the lines of "[I saw ] shuttle land[ed] in back court, no distraction [obstruction]," or words to that effect. Such a ruling is precisely why there is the umpire, to adjudicate, arbitrate, situations, situations that have basis in law and are recommended practices. There is no reason for an umpire to say, "that's how it is," or worse "I got distracted," and call a let.
Consider the situation here - player argues s/he became distracted with shuttle in back court when going for a net kill. I hear you ask, how does an umpire handle this? You asked, didn't you? If I am on the hot seat, I tell player, "I understand what you say. Shuttle in back court, you play front court, in my opinion, not a distraction, not a safety issue." May also add if required "You noticed after you lost the rally. I know what is going on here." If s/he continues to not play, then I bring the 4-tonne wt on his/her head, also called the book of laws (see above). What is the umpire doing here? First showing empathy by listening to the player point of view. Then addressing the situation with fact. Then giving the ruling preface by "in my opinion" which is the recommendation. Now, the player can continue to argue, or start waving racquet, as many other players at elite level do to call the referee. Start counting, you addressed the player concern with proper ruling when there was no distraction or safety issue. That's 1. Now the player argues and delays the play, that's 2. Pretty soon, the umpire will have adequate reason(s) to warn, or fault the player. And if I am a player, then now that I have had that 8 or 10 seconds of break, I will get on the task of winning the next rally, which is my primary aim anyway.
A good umpire will wait just that tiny bit more before making the decision to call or not call let. A great umpire will additionally be unobtrusive, but not invisible, and never gutless.
Last edited by 2wheels04; 12-09-2013 at 07:37 PM.
12-09-2013, 08:16 PM #12
A great umpire will just call let. Who is to say what the player is looking at, what the player has seen in his peripheral vision to put him off defending a net kill. Dealing with two shuttles on a court is not part of the game of badminton hence the rule, instant let, no ifs or buts. That recommendations thing to technical officials is ridiculous.
Last edited by craigandy; 12-09-2013 at 08:24 PM.
12-09-2013, 08:35 PM #13