User Tag List

View Poll Results: Allow coaching between points?

Voters
55. You may not vote on this poll
  • No

    34 61.82%
  • Yes

    16 29.09%
  • it's complicated..

    5 9.09%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 18 to 34 of 43
  1. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Pau/France
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think this kinda brings another question then: would you separate singles, doubles and mixed when considering coaching?

    IMO, Singles being a 1v1 battle, I wouldn't mind if we forbade coaching completely, but TBH in Doubles and Mixed it's a huge part of the game, as it's a lot more tactical and relying on details.

    Good coaching can help level up the game between two roughly equivalent pairs (to find 2 pairs exactly even is very hard, but when you do have them, they produce the most interesting games, even at a low level of play!) and i think everybody wins then, cause you just make badminton better to watch and play.

    On a side note, i see a lot of people linking this to tennis, saying there is no interaction between coaches and players, but i've seen professional players talking to themselves on the court on second-rate tournaments with their coach sitting right behind them in the stands and providing advice (mental advice cause the guy is damn unstable^^). Just saying.
    Plus, during team events such as the Davis Cup, coaching IS allowed during breaks...

    Anyway, as long as coaching does not slow the game, can't see why you would get rid of it...
    And as someone was saying, receving advice is one thing, being able to apply it is another^^

  2. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,010
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What I admire most in an athlete is someone who overcomes adversity by skill, committment and his wits.


    If I wanted to see a mindless hunk of meat perform physical feats with every move directed bya coach from the sidelines, I'd watch American Football.

  3. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What's wrong with coaching? Keep it allowed, just as it is. The match is played by the player, yes, but the coach is an extra tool at the player's disposal. BTW coaching may be forbidden in tennis but it happens all the time anyway through hand-signals and what not. Players need coaches.

    Also it's not like the player has to follow every step of advice the coach gives. It's still up to the player to decide which advice seems relevant and to try to implement this into the match. What I'm saying is just because a player is getting coaching, it's not like the player doesn't have to think for him/herself at all.

  4. #21
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    10,246
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    If we're so concerned about pros wasting or stalling for time in between points, then there're a lot more other significant time wasters to vote to get rid of than a quick 1-2 sec coaching pointer.


    Like the 2-3 secs of communication between doubles players between each and every rally. Really, do they need to chat about tactics in the middle of a game? Don't they discuss this in practice and training time already?


    Like that pat of hands between doubles players before each and every rally, that used to be only done by Boe/Mo, but now seems like every pair has picked up this time wasting habit.
    That's easily 2 secs right there.


    Or that hand signalling behind the back that the front server does to secretly indicate his serve selection to his partner, each and every rally. Worst culprits are MJ and ZYL, who already take an interminably long time to serve; so from the time of their serve signal to the actual service delivery, the receiver's legs are probably starting to fall asleep.
    That's easily 3-5 secs there.


    Or what about that walking around off court to flick sweat off the face, after each and every rally, or worse yet, to blow the nose.
    That's some 3-5 secs there.


    Or that 5-10 secs going around the court kicking and scrubbing their shoes at imaginary drops of sweat at various spots on the mat.


    I'm sure some of you can think of more time wasters than what I've listed...
    Last edited by visor; 07-10-2014 at 09:13 PM.

  5. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    925
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    the question about coaching between points, and even more between games, is not about time wasting (in my eyes), but interference in the confrontation between the two sides.

  6. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Smashikon, Driveland
    Posts
    726
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I wonder what people would say, if continous and fast play was enforced and the quality of the rallies would decline drmatically. Let's face the fact: Long and high quality rallies as we see them in men's singles nowaday are only possible if you allow the players to settle in between rallies. Without those breaks, more unforced errors and shorter rallies are the obvious result. You may decide...

  7. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    925
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    That is true. Thereshould be a clear rule about this "continuous play". Beside, the players often "towel down' during the games, which is against the rules.
    Coaching is different. Delay the match because of exchanges between players and coaches are not allowed by umpires.
    What sprung this thread was coaches that could - or not - call the shuttle in or out to their players.
    For the ones that think it is ok to do so, there is this question : do you think it is all right too for the coaches to shout " leave it" when they see its long, or "it's in" when they think so?

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    4,244
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://www.bwfbadminton.org/file.aspx?id=558308&dl=1

    I have a few observations of the rules on instant review:

    (1) The decision to challenge is to be made by the player(s). If player(s) consult his or their coach beforehand, then I don't think it can be regarded as the player's or the players'.
    (2) The challenge must be made "immediately". Consulting your coach before challenging clearly would not be regarded as immediate in my own view.
    (3) However, the rules say the challenge is to be made by a "player/pair". It is arguable that the decision to challenge can be made by the "pair", ie collectively. I would interpret that to mean a player may consult his or her partner so long as the challenge is made immediately.
    Last edited by pcll99; 07-11-2014 at 07:30 AM.

  9. #26
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    925
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well said.

  10. #27
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Pau/France
    Posts
    29
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcll99 View Post
    http://www.bwfbadminton.org/file.aspx?id=558308&dl=1

    I have a few observations of the rules on instant review:

    (1) The decision to challenge is to be made by the player(s). If player(s) consult his or their coach beforehand, then I don't think it can be regarded as the player's or the players'.
    (2) The challenge must be made "immediately". Consulting your coach before challenging clearly would not be regarded as immediate in my own view.
    (3) However, the rules say the challenge is to be made by a "player/pair". It is arguable that the decision to challenge can be made by the "pair", ie collectively. I would interpret that to mean a player may consult his or her partner so long as the challenge is made immediately.
    Don't see what's troubling you here:
    1 - The decision is ultimately taken by the player: getting his coach's opinion is fine, he just gets the last call (i'm guessing this rule is here to prevent some kind of abuse by coaches, such as overreacting to a bad call)

    2- Immediately, is, IMO, to be taken as "before the next point is played", or in such cases, "before you take the interval break". This is to avoid challenges after the game when they see the replay on television, i presume.

    3- Wouldn't you say that a coach and a singles player form a pair, in many regards?

  11. #28
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    4,244
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Did you read the rules? If not, here it is:

    "2.1 The challenge must be made immediately after the shuttle has landed and the call made."


    Quote Originally Posted by Yuzo64 View Post
    Don't see what's troubling you here:
    1 - The decision is ultimately taken by the player: getting his coach's opinion is fine, he just gets the last call (i'm guessing this rule is here to prevent some kind of abuse by coaches, such as overreacting to a bad call)

    2- Immediately, is, IMO, to be taken as "before the next point is played", or in such cases, "before you take the interval break". This is to avoid challenges after the game when they see the replay on television, i presume.

    3- Wouldn't you say that a coach and a singles player form a pair, in many regards?

  12. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    43
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I say let them coach from sidelines and do whatever else they want unless it wastes time. Quite honestly, its the reason I've gotten bored of Tennis. It is such a sterile environment. The umpires are the biggest waster of time there with the regular calls for .... "Quiet Please".

    In badminton, I feel that by allowing coaching, we are getting the best game possible physically, tactically and mentally. I am sure that in the heat of battle, most instructions are lost on a player and they will instinctively do what they do best but having it re-enforced by their coaches gives us all a more exciting game....

  13. #30
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    925
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Coaches in tennis are private coaches. Coaches in Badminton are national coaches. What you get is not "more exiting games" (where have you been the last 15 years?) but more standardized play. Badminton is less and less pleasant to watch.
    The needs of badminton, I believe, is less national involvment, which block a real professional badminton to emerge, and more individual involvment.

  14. #31
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    oz
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i was helping with lines judging in the recent star oz badddy open superseries.
    at times with the coach(es) sitting next to me courtside. i can see the value(s) SOME coaches
    can give to their players. the coach for the chinese WD would have been beneficial to her players.
    i didnt detect her trying to delay or interrrupt the flow of the match.
    some other coaches....their abusive/language would have been negative influence.

  15. #32
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    10,246
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wahchai305 View Post
    i was helping with lines judging in the recent star oz badddy open superseries.
    at times with the coach(es) sitting next to me courtside. i can see the value(s) SOME coaches
    can give to their players. the coach for the chinese WD would have been beneficial to her players.
    i didnt detect her trying to delay or interrrupt the flow of the match.
    some other coaches....their abusive/language would have been negative influence.
    Cool, tks for your input!

    Btw, which country were the abusive coaches from? Can't imagine why they would want to negatively impact their own players.

  16. #33
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NorCal, United States
    Posts
    935
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    My answer is yes/no.

    I don't mind coaching when it's not disrupting the flow of the match, a quick pointer or something, but it shouldn't delay the game(technically it's not supposed to). So more strict enforcement of that. I want to see quicker matches instead of like 20-30 seconds between each point unless the rallies start getting long and the match getting intense, then there's some leeway. As a spectator, I lose interest in the match quickly that way.

  17. #34
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    oz
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by visor View Post
    Cool, tks for your input!

    Btw, which country were the abusive coaches from? Can't imagine why they would want to negatively impact their own players.
    this being an open forum, i rather desist from naming them.
    overall, it is always interesting picking up on their insights on the evolving game.
    repeatedly i have to remind myself to fully concentrate on my task. :-)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 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
  •