User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 17 of 22
  1. #1
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default Opponent hits the net with racket...

    Interesting situation came up few days ago while playing MD.

    I had made a desperate backhand return of a drive and my drive return was heading loosely towards the net. However it didn't cross the net, only to hit the net on my side about 3 inches below tape. The opponent front player saw the loose return and leapt to intercept it, but only to hit the bird *through* the net.

    Who should get the point?

    Him, because my shot is already a fault having hit the net and started falling to the ground on my side? But it hadn't hit the ground yet.

    Or me, because he faulted on hitting the net?

    The question is when is the rally over: when the bird hit the net and started falling on my side, or when it hit the ground?

    I think I know, but he gave me the point anyways...

  2. #2
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,909
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    15. SHUTTLE NOT IN PLAY
    A shuttle is not in play when:

    15.1 it strikes the net or post and starts to fall towards the surface of the court on the striker’s side of
    the net;

    15.2 it hits the surface of the court; or

    15.3 a ‘fault’ or a ‘let’ has occurred.
    so it appears that 15.1 applies here. so as long as he hits the net *after* the shuttle starts to fall, then it is his point.

  3. #3
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, and I guess it's hard to discern when and how much it should fall before deciding the rally is over. In my case it probably had fallen maybe 0.5 inches or so before he hit it.
    Last edited by visor; 01-17-2014 at 03:53 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NorCal, United States
    Posts
    855
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What kwun said is correct. I guess it's more of, if you're 100% ascertain that the shuttle is not going to cross over the net, and your opponent then hits the net, then the rally has already ended.

  5. #5
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CantSmashThis View Post
    What kwun said is correct. I guess it's more of, if you're 100% ascertain that the shuttle is not going to cross over the net, and your opponent then hits the net, then the rally has already ended.
    Ah, but it doesn't matter whether I knew or not it wasn't going to cross the net, but more importantly the opponent didn't know it was not going to cross the net and hit it thru the net, thinking that it was going to cross.

    The question then becomes when do we decide the rally is over in this case, when it falls by 1 inch or more, or? In any case, iirc I think he hit the net the moment the shuttle hit the net, so the shuttle hadn't had a chance to fall yet, so the rally wasn't over yet at that moment.

  6. #6
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,909
    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    it is actually a very interesting scenario.

    we have to realize that the net is not a solid wall. usually when the shuttlecock hits it, there is a certain "dwell" time in which the shuttlecock is "caught in the net", and then after that it starts falling. that amount of time is the buffer zone between your opponent trying to take a risk or just late at hitting it.

    in other words, the rule was actually quite well thought out. interpreting it literally means that it prevents the hitter from just blindly hitting the net at this type of situation.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,776
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    visor, the rule is clear - hits the net and STARTs to fall. No need to give any number. As soon as the shuttle 'starts to fall', then it is fault.

    Even if it doesn't start to fall, then it is also a fault - a stuck shuttle on the strikers side is a fault.

  8. #8
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I tend to interpret it like kwun, as 15.1 stated.

    amleto, if in the next little while, I start to whack at the net every time my opponent's shot hit the net on their side and starts to fall, I'll see how successful I can be in arguing that I should get the point.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    local to the coast
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    +1.
    he should've been a better judge. i'd just pretend im about to sneeze.....and blow at it . easy done! j/k!

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    local to the coast
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by visor View Post
    hit the bird *through* the net.
    geez, just buy a new net without such a big hole, you cheapos! (just kidding ).
    i think it's his point too?

    btw, i've faced a somewhat similar situation: opponent did what visor did, i was already in place, it was easy shot. i'm prone to showing off a bit now and then so i temporarily averted my gaze to look at my team with an 'i've nailed it, this guy's toast' expression, stood there like a traffic policeman with a stop sign (the racket being the stop sign), so the birdie would make contact with the racket and fall while i just stand like a statue. because of the draft or whatever, it got ever so slightly delayed and landed on the net, but my racket was only a few millimeters away, perfectly 90 degress vertical, WITHOUT crossing it; the bird landed on the net, then hit my 'frozen' racket, then fell on his side and i got the point. but the opponent's team watching from near the net protested (umpire was one of us, it was a friendly match) that because of the movement of the birdie, it pushed the net and the net touched my racket and thus, it was a fault.

    what do you guys think? i never crossed or touched the net with my racket or any part of the body, i was quite sure of it. i didn't want to yell back to them 'it was the net that made contact with my racket' as it'd sound crazy if taken out of context lol so i just let him have the point as it'd not affect the game's outcome.

  11. #11
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Lol... the net hit your racket?!! That's a new one... haven't heard of that before.

    But still you had faulted first (doesn't matter what, you still made contact with the net) so point goes to opponent.

  12. #12
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Btw, in my OP, there was no hole in the net. The opponent was standing very close to the net and hit the net while trying to hit the bird that was falling down on my side of the net.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    local to the coast
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i know, i was just trying to have some fun with that sentence .

    just putting this out there to get your opinions:
    eventhough a player is standing there, albeit real real close to the net but definitely not making contact with it, and the birdie hitting the net forced the net (let's say the cord of the net is a little wobbly) to move 1-2cms towards him and touched his racket, would you say it's a fault technically?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,776
    Mentioned
    22 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yes, if the shuttle hasn't started to fall to the opponents side when you touch the net

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    local to the coast
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    so it doesn't matter if the net 'got pushed' towards/into my racket (even when im stationary)?
    i know the chances of this happening are very very slim but just curious

  16. #16
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,130
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sorry, but even if the net post had toppled over along with the net to touch your racket and body while your were just standing there, you're still at fault.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    local to the coast
    Posts
    281
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol, thanks for clarifying that. i guess its better for me to not go for the overkill and stand a couple cm back.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •