User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 17 of 21
  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Big error from umpire in ETC semifinal

    In yesterday's ETC semifinal between Russia and Germany, at 19-19 in the second set, the umpire called a fault on the Russian woman when she was about to serve. She was preparing to serve a low backhand serve. She had completed her takeback of the racket, and then she aborted her service, probably because she was distracted by a motion of the receiver. Now we hear the umpire shouting "FAULT".

    The umpire says nothing more, and the Russian girl is about to start her service again. But the German women obviously heard the umpire say fault, so they walk up to him. The umpire realizes he has to stick with what he said, so he says "service over, 20-19", hereby awarding a very crucial point to the Germans who could go on to take the second set 21-19.

    In the set-break we can hear the service judge discuss with the umpire about his decision, explaining to the umpire that the service rule was not broken (the forward motion of the racket had not started), and we can hear the umpire at first trying to defend his decision (the serve has to be one fluent motion), and then I THINK I heard him saying "ok I guess I was wrong". Am I right in thinking that this was a bad mistake by the umpire? The service only begins upon the first forward-motion of the racket, right?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    2,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am guessing that the umpire meant to say "LET" instead of "FAULT". He could have just told the German ladies that he made the mistake and no harm done but instead he gave in (which in my opinion is probably the crucial mistake made).

    Quote Originally Posted by vixter View Post
    In yesterday's ETC semifinal between Russia and Germany, at 19-19 in the second set, the umpire called a fault on the Russian woman when she was about to serve. She was preparing to serve a low backhand serve. She had completed her takeback of the racket, and then she aborted her service, probably because she was distracted by a motion of the receiver. Now we hear the umpire shouting "FAULT".

    The umpire says nothing more, and the Russian girl is about to start her service again. But the German women obviously heard the umpire say fault, so they walk up to him. The umpire realizes he has to stick with what he said, so he says "service over, 20-19", hereby awarding a very crucial point to the Germans who could go on to take the second set 21-19.

    In the set-break we can hear the service judge discuss with the umpire about his decision, explaining to the umpire that the service rule was not broken (the forward motion of the racket had not started), and we can hear the umpire at first trying to defend his decision (the serve has to be one fluent motion), and then I THINK I heard him saying "ok I guess I was wrong". Am I right in thinking that this was a bad mistake by the umpire? The service only begins upon the first forward-motion of the racket, right?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    But can a let be called before the point has begun? Lets are called to stop a rally and replay the point. She hadn't served yet.

    I guess it makes sense though, because as an umpire how can you not know the service rules. Maybe you are right, and he just didn't want to admit he called fault instead of let. But it's pretty scandalous either way.

    The Russians won the 3rd set anyway so it didn't affect the outcome of this match. But they might have won in 2 sets and be fresher for today's final.
    Last edited by vixter; 02-16-2014 at 07:19 PM.

  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    14,125
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am surprised the umpire calls a service fault when a service judge is there to do that for the umpire.

  5. #5
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,567
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    that follow on discussion on the other thread re. video replays.
    should players/coaches allow to challenge umpire decision with video replay?

  6. #6
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,332
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Um, you cannot have a service fault before the shuttle is served.
    I'm surprised the Russians didn't ask to see the chief referee.

  7. #7
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,567
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Oldhand View Post
    Um, you cannot have a service fault before the shuttle is served.
    I'm surprised the Russians didn't ask to see the chief referee.
    if i'm concentrating on my serve and heard something from the umpire's desk I would assume it's a 'let' as well.

  8. #8
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,855
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have not seen it as streaming was not available here, but the call is legitimate enough. Aborting a serve because of distraction before you start your back swing is fair enough, but to abort after back swing is just games and should be faulted.(unless a foreign object fell on the court or something)

    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;

  9. #9
    Regular Member demolidor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    @Hollanti
    Posts
    11,827
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If the destraction is the receiver moving is it not fault receiver?

  10. #10
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,855
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by demolidor View Post
    If the destraction is the receiver moving is it not fault receiver?
    The receiver Does not have to be deadly still. As long as one part of both feet remains in constant contact with the ground. Was the German girl waving or pulling faces or something? You can't just decide you are distracted at every little movement. You may get away with it before a takeback but not after.
    If I was allowed to cancel serves after any takeback I could use this as a severe tactical advantage.

  11. #11
    Regular Member demolidor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    @Hollanti
    Posts
    11,827
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well probably depended on what happened, I just had the fault receiver call in my head that actually happened in one of the MD matches.
    Sounds like the server got caught out by a legal motion which would make it a correct call.

  12. #12
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,855
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    strangely enough if the umpire did say this - "we can hear the umpire at first trying to defend his decision
    "(the serve has to be one fluent motion)". "
    Then the umpire was wrong about his statement because the service had not started, but luckily he had called a fault correctly anyways, because that is an undue delay fault as stated in 9.1.1
    My feeling is the umpire knew the rule but did not express himself properly when challenged by the service judge at the interval.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by craigandy View Post
    strangely enough if the umpire did say this - "we can hear the umpire at first trying to defend his decision
    "(the serve has to be one fluent motion)". "
    Then the umpire was wrong about his statement because the service had not started, but luckily he had called a fault correctly anyways, because that is an undue delay fault as stated in 9.1.1
    My feeling is the umpire knew the rule but did not express himself properly when challenged by the service judge at the interval.
    I think you are completely right. Now I understand the umpire calling a fault, because it was an undue delay. Birgit Michels wasn't doing anything particularly distracting. So the call was warranted, the umpire just didn't refer to the right rule when explaining his decision.

    This makes sense to me now because after all, there was no protests from the Russian coaches. So I stand corrected, the call wasn't scandalous at all.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NorCal, United States
    Posts
    927
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Undue delay would be the call. It would be an umpire's decision to call undue delay of service (not the service judge).

    Ma Jin was called on it once at match point by the umpire and Gillian Clark was arguing about what the umpire was doing, and that it should be the service judge's call (which is incorrect).

    Anyways, if the umpire made a mistake, he should've apologized if he recognized it pretty instantly he made the wrong call. I guess there would be arguments and stuff, but I would've apologized and said I made a mistake (this wasn't a rally, this was before too). Humans make mistakes sometimes.

  15. #15
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,855
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    On a side note. I did find the umpires at the ETC rather strange.

    One umpire got so excited he made some sort of chicken noise mid rally 24m28s to 24m30s
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cleTr-1yxFA

    There was also a WD match involving Corrales & Marin V German i think. The umpire seemed to take a dislike to the Spanish girls and on a few occasions after their opponents killed the shuttle he shouted out yess! Then called the score. It was quite bizarre.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ^LOLOLOL whyyy umpire is a chicken in disguise

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    local to the coast
    Posts
    313
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    does anyone have video?

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
  •