User Tag List

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 69 to 72 of 72
  1. #69
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    SIngapore
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am not sure why so much fuss over this. I donít know about you guys, to me it is very clear but subjected to umpire decision. If you watch Youtube matches at international level, so often I heard about service above waist not faulted. Even Yang Yang commented on a game about umpire decision to call for fault service due to different players have different waist height playing in the same match. Just for benefit of doubt to the shorter player. They allowed it but for flick service, they will fault you. Subjective Umpire?
    Someone mentioned this before, If you play a tight game at the front and given that kind of opportunity, and avoid touching the net, would you have such a big swing as to the entire racket would go over the net? Just observe many of the matches on Youtube and you will see. Just this afternoon, another Youtube commentary by Zhao Jian Hua, commented that players whose leg cross over the line is contributing to a fault, just like touching the pole.
    The block at the front, there is no such thing as a stroke must be execute to block. So many times, racket can be in front blocking except no obstruction to opposing players. Again, subject to umpire decision not forgetting if you opposing players complain, or you are deem as a disturbance/distraction to opposing players.
    Last edited by bbmars; 09-16-2014 at 08:16 AM.

  2. #70
    New Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Pune, India
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This is a law and I absolutely agree.
    Quote Originally Posted by phihag View Post
    Blocks being forbidden and a stroke being necessary is an often-repeated myth. In fact, it's so common that it was explictly addressed in my umpire's seminar. There is no such rule.

    The only applicable rule in this situation is:

    ß13.3.4 It shall be a fault if, in play, a player obstructs an opponent, i.e. prevents an opponent from making a legal stroke where the shuttle is followed over the net

    If you could not play the kill shot as you wanted to avoid a clash of rackets, your opponent has commited a fault, and the rally ends right there.

    But it sounds like you played the kill shot just fine. In that case, the game continues, and if you are unable to return the shuttle that bounced back into your court, that's a point for the opponent.

  3. #71
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    korea
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm pretty sure i've seen a youtube video of a international match.

    The shuttlecock was at mid court and he smashed it but then the opponent predicted the shot and just kneeled right behind the net and raised his racket and it just bounced off the racket to the smasher's court. I'm sure the blocker got the point for that.

  4. #72
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,788
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bbmars View Post
    would you have such a big swing as to the entire racket would go over the net?
    That's the million dollar question, How big was the players follow through going to be? and to what common standard do they judge that? Thats how it differs from serve there is a common standard to judge, it is if the shuttle is below the waist (bottom rib)
    Last edited by craigandy; 09-16-2014 at 01:54 PM.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5

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
  •