Background: Recreational league, non-tournament, games are doubles pick-up games with no set partners,teams switch every game. While people play hard to win, it's a league where having fun takes priority over competitiveness. Scenario: pretty close game, Team A is up by 2, maybe 17 to 15. Team A clears deep, Team B scrambles, hits weak clear in response. Team B's shot absolutely (100.000000% certainty) will fall at least 3 feet (at least 1m) short of crossing the net - Team B loses point, Team A wins point, right? There can be no dispute whatsoever of the outcome - Team B's shot wasn't even close to clearing the net. But wait: Before Team B's shot hits the ground on Team B’s side of the net, Player A1, as a joke and just goofing around, slides up to the net, reaches under the net, lifts the net with his racquet as he is doing so, and hits Team B’s shot up before it hit the ground and tries to “help” Team B get the shot over the net. This is purely for entertainment – for all intents and purposes Team B’s shot wasn’t really in play any more since it so obviously wasn’t even going to cross the net and Team A won the point. This was the equivalent of a player swatting at the shuttle with a second shot, helping his partner’s first bad shot (or maybe even his own) over the net. We’ve all done this at one time or another with a sheepish grin on our faces, having lost the point. Given all of the above (remember, this is a recreational game, not a tournament), if you are on Team B, do you: Applaud and with a smile, say “Well done, you should help us on more of our shots!” and get ready to receive Team A’s serve on the next point; or Snap at your opponents “YOU HIT THE NET! YOU HIT THE NET! IT’S OUR POINT!!!” and insist on following the ultra-strict letter of the law/rule, claiming that Player A1’s actions in hitting the net gave the point to Team B, notwithstanding that your original, weak clear could never have gone over the net and Player A1 was merely goofing around to lighten the mood. Please respond to survey and discuss.
Hmmm, I seem to have problems with formatting on this site - when I copied and pasted from Word, I didn't have two "Choice 1" options listed. I guess since this account is a new one, I can't edit my posts, either. Anyone have an opinion on this? Choice 1, playing within the spirit of the game to have a good time, or Choice 2, be a ball-busting rules gunner?
haha who won in the end? If it was at least 1meter away from net and below the net height I would laugh and not call upon the rules in social play.
The rules are clear: According to §15, until the shuttle hits the ground or a fault is commited, it is in play. It does not matter whether anyone thinks the shuttle is going out (or, in this case, a fault is going to be commited). That's why umpires/line judges wait for the shuttle to hit the ground to call out, and coaches must defer any training (including encouraging shouts) until it does. It's quite obvious that touching the net is a fault; §13.4.1 is quite clear about that. Quite obviously, side B played Badminton, whereas player A1 played Badminton with additional home rules ("if it's obvious one side is going to win the point, a fault has been commited"). Trouble is, home rules are not in effect unless consented to by all parties. Unless B consented to play with the home rules, it's their point. Side A would by tacky to dispute that it's service over, 16:17 ; they should learn to not goof around during a game.
If in the same scenario team "B" had hit the shuttle all the way to the net and it hit the net but started to drop on their side and then team "A" guy reached under and played the shuttle before hitting the ground that is no fault to team "A" and team "A" would still receive the point. So if your mates into messing around tell him to try that next time but take a rule book
Home rules? The spirit of good sportsmanship and having fun are "home rules?" Tacky? Are you sure it wouldn't be tackier to insist on having a point you know you lost, when the other side was simply engaged in an attempt at humor? Sure, it would be appropriate if a) it was a tournament where rules should be followed strictly, or b) your shot cleared the net and the opponent, trying to goof around instead of putting away the absolute "gimme" shot you presented to him wrapped in a bow, attempted some sort of trick shot and missed. But we're not talking dumb luck here. Would you really feel proud of yourself, feel good about yourself, insisting that despite your poor play on that rally, that you, not the other side who actually hit the winning shot, deserves the point? Is this any different than if your opponent, standing on the back line of the court, jumps up and catches in his hand 7' off the ground your shot that was going 15' or 20' out? In social play are you going to call that your point, too, even if you're technically correct within the strict wording of the rules?
Well, there's no use arguing otherwise - I was pretty steamed, my partner seemed shocked and dumbfounded and after that point we lost focus, flat-out choked, and lost the game. However, I would have posted this here regardless of the outcome of that match. As far as match outcomes (as opposed to a single point), I was actually more angry at myself about two earlier matches in which we let the opponents get on a hot streak, in one game they kept picking on my partner who kept setting them up with easy clears, in the other I kept making unforced errors, resulting in very lopsided, embarrassing losses. Oddly enough, most of my other matches involved very lopsided victories by 10+ points.
Yes, by definition they are, because they are not mentioned (at least as you understand them) in the official rulebook. The problem is that you need universally agreed-upon rules; otherwise someone could claim that "the spirit of good sportsmanship" includes not smashing on ladies, and "having fun" includes the receiver being able to move before the shuttle is struck. See http://goo.gl/6IIAhb for a whole essay on the topic. But that's the point - team B knows it *won* the point. Only in your version of the rules did B lose the point. The rules of Badminton are totally oblivious to who "deserves" to win the point (again, see the essay for a more detailed discussion about this). Yes, of course. Note that 1. your opponents did not follow your definition of "social play" and played by the standard rules, and 2. if you're arguing that in "social play" rules are of no concern, why do you care about the result in the first place?
The rules are clear, right? That having said, your "friendly matches" don't seem to be THAT friendly, right? Just speaking for myself: In a training/fun match, I would never claim the point here. Sometimes, in a training match, you just catch the shuttle before it lands in the far out (after a mishit or something) and continue to play as if it had landed out. Noone would claim the point here in our training. It's a different thing in league matches/competition play. Here, I would always insist on the rules! Seems like your buddies are more on the competitive side. Nothing wrong with that, next time you know better and stop making jokes. If the setting is really social and those kind of jokes are normal, your buddies are dickheads. But the point is theirs...;-)
I strongly suspect that had the opponents been up by 5 at the time, they would have laughed. But they were losing and used this ridiculous adherence to the rules to effect a 2-point swing in the game. I honestly gave a brief thought to hooking them on a point (is that just a tennis term for cheating on line calls or is it used in badminton, too?), in retaliation and to swing the score back to what it should have been, calling "out" a shot of theirs that very obviously was in and then saying "If you can use ridiculously strict adherence to the rules to demand that you won a point that you clearly lost, then I can do the same thing by declaring your shot out and reminding you of the rule that it's my call whether or not the shuttle was in, not yours." But I hate cheating in all forms and I'd rather lose a match than win a single point by playing less than honestly and honorably. I've been accused in the past of being a rules gunner in tournaments, when the older rules on legal serves were in effect and we had some people flicking serves with their racquet heads six inches or more above their hands (rule used to be the serving hand had to be above the head of the racquet), or when someone was an excessive shouter and was pretty obviously doing it to cause a hindrance. However in both cases, the violation of the rules was causing an unfair advantage in favor of the person breaking the rule, and in any event, I always gave them a warning and reminded them of what the rule was, and never insisted on a loss of point unless and until they violated the rule a second or subsequent time. It's not that the rules are of no consequence in recreational play, it's just that one should not adhere to them in hyper-strict fashion. Let's say two good friends are my opponents, the one behind gooses his partner in the arse as a joke just as he is serving and the serve goes out. Technically, I win the point, since the teammate caused the hindrance. But no way in a million years am I going to be a dickhead and shrilly claim "My point!" - I'm hitting the shuttle back to them and I'll say with a grin "Do it over." But someone like PhilHag is going to sneeringly add a point to his score and insist that its his team's serve now.
The trouble with the 'spirit' of the game is that it is very difficult to define. I suspect that everyone's definition would differ in some way from everyone else. The rules are as they are because they are the least ambiguous they can be. Apologies for the double negative, but I feel that it is justified. Whilst I certainly wouldn't have claimed a point in this situation, I would have asked my opponents not to hit the net again, even in jest. If you allow minor infringements of the rules, you start a slippery slope with increasingly dubious infringements. As everyone's definition of what 'gaining and advantage' means, sooner or later you will have an argument. It's just not worth it. Whilst your partner was just goofing about, your opposition may have (at the time at least) found their actions insulting. It is also questionable whether messing about is appropriate in a close game. I do sympathize, but there's a difference between being competitive and being professional. Even in a non-competitive situation, you should always be professional & your partner wasn't.
In a competitive (even if in social game), he probably had crossed the line. Even if in completely social game amongst old friends, if the opponents were not the easy going type, he still had crossed the line. It was bad judgment at the time for him. Oh well, just put it down as live and learn.
A casual jest or taunting in bad taste? It would seem like a rather benign bit of fun, and given some of the friends and groups I play with these days, would even be appropriate - with or without the Guinness... But if we didn't really know the other team or not on a very friendly basis, it could have been interpreted as a taunt or put down. It's still a judgment call on the player and accept the consequences, whatever direction it takes. Then get on with it.
honestly i would probably play out the rally if the opponent kept it going like that. In this situation though, if it is unclear if the intent of hitting it was indecision, even possibly, then it should be a fault. otherwise, it shouldn't really be a fault.
