View Poll Results: IN or OUT?
- 84. You may not vote on this poll
Thread: IN or OUT?
09-21-2004, 03:59 AM #69
Well, what can I say... guess the other half of the voters didn't need to change their eyewear prescriptions.
09-21-2004, 04:05 AM #70Originally Posted by kwun
09-21-2004, 04:05 AM #71
That does not mean it's legally out. The linesman may have made a wrong call but as you know it, the call cannot be overruled.
If half of the BC population says its out then it's way too close to be accurate here. So, if they say it's in, then it's an in.
I still say it's out.
09-21-2004, 05:16 AM #72Originally Posted by wilfredlgf
What BFers may think by watching a poor quality picture doesn't mean much compared to judging it live in real life!!
09-21-2004, 05:46 AM #73
The linesman for the call in question was:
|_| Correct! (it was close enuff to be good?)
|_| Dead Wrong! (both the lineman & his seeing eye dog should go!)
I had assumed that the picture quality was such that it made the shuttle appear as if it might be touching the line when, in fact, it did not.
As a linesman, I would possibly call this shout OUT. However, if I had to make this same call against an opponent, I might be inclined to give them the benefit it I was not 100% sure.
Did NE1 see the US Open (tennis) 2 weeks ago? There was a close WS QF match between J. Capriati & Serena Williams. In the 3rd & deciding set, there was several (4?) line calls made against Serena that appeared to be blatantly wrong. If I remember correctly, the worst of the calls was an over-rule by the chair umpire on a ball that was clearly inside the line (not even touching it). The linesperson had correctly indicated that the ball was IN, but for some unknown reason the chair decided to over-rule.
This just goes to show that linepersons & umpires are fallible even tho' they are undoubtedly screened & highly trained for grand slam events in order to minimize these types of errors.
Last edited by gregr999; 09-21-2004 at 05:49 AM.
09-21-2004, 05:50 AM #74
LOL, i should have known this is kwun's trick question or a clip of a questionable line call IMO, that call is a plain jane out. We all watched tournaments before and know that line judges do make errors.
In this case, the line judge called in a instance where as I and other have ample times to eyeball that freeze frame to make the real right call.
09-21-2004, 06:06 AM #75
Now that we have the answer, we are not going to start argueing about whether the linesman was right or wrong.
If some people think they are capable of knowing better than the linesman whether it is IN or OUT by just watching this picture ... well, so much the better for them.
There are always people who think they know better than the umpire/referee, whatever the sport...
09-21-2004, 06:59 AM #76
Still, seven, what we have here is a still frame and we have tonnes of time to look at it carefully. The linesman could only see it within a fraction of a second. Who do you think would have a better look at it? They must make a decision within the couple of seconds.
A quote from Bill Shankly from football, "The problem with referees is that they know the rules but the don't know the game".
09-21-2004, 07:14 AM #77
Do you think your call will be better if you watch this picture for hours?
I remember in football at world cup 98, the referee gave a penalty to Norway against Brazil.
By watching the TV videos over and over, everyone agreed that there was NO foul.
Then one or two years later, they found an amateur video from another angle... which proved there was a foul and that the referee was right!
All this to say that you shouldn't beleive what you see on a picture or on a video, the best person to judge is the one who sees it IN REAL and has been prepared in order to judge. (all the rest is only telespectator's OPINION, not facts)
09-21-2004, 09:22 AM #78
Camera angles on football games have more margin for error however.On a badminton court IF the camera is exactly facing along the line, then any foot after wards should be more accurate (provided it has a clear view.)
However this particular case, and most tv cameras AREN'T facing exactly down the line. Also on a still, the frames are only a certain muber of frames per second, so errors are there. More errors can come from if the shuttle was smashed onto the line, as the cork may spread out and bee in contact with the line in a still, but the first contact may be out.
It is a continous argument. Good luck!
09-21-2004, 11:26 AM #79Originally Posted by kwun
09-21-2004, 12:07 PM #80Originally Posted by jamesd20
09-21-2004, 12:15 PM #81Originally Posted by kwun
09-21-2004, 12:40 PM #82Originally Posted by seven
I believe the attached photo relates to a questionable call with questionable judgement made. Why else kwun wanna field this line call situation with us all If this was a correct call, it would be just one of many thousands line calls that the 'viewer' see from watching his/her badminton tapes
found some of the threads
Last edited by cooler; 09-21-2004 at 12:52 PM.
09-21-2004, 03:36 PM #83
Everyone agrees this is a close call and there is really no definite answer. That is why it is called a line*judge*, in short, a call based on human judgement.
Lets invite the same linejudge, who called this IN during the match, to BF. We show him the same image and ask if he calls it IN or OUT. I will not be surprise if the answer is different. Even on the same day, I am not surprised the same linejudge yields different result for this type of close call.
09-21-2004, 07:01 PM #84Originally Posted by cooler
Thanks for links and information.
But from experience, this is incorrect.
1. Had extensive training before Sydney 2000,
including a WHTYE Trophy match.
2. Had training and revison at Olympic Test event.
3. Had revison at Olympic venue before Olympic Games started.
4. Sydney 2000 officials had uniforms.
5. Yes we were unpaid volunters generally, but got an allowance for Olympics, accomodations, meals etc.
6. All had Badminton experience over quite a number of years. And were not from different sports.
7. There are always disputes by players - that is the nature of the game.
There a quite a few players that are difficult.
8. Line Judges at seated down at court level opposite the lines they are covering, not up high looking down at camera shots with fuzzy feeds.
9. Yes Greece has International Badminton players -
Men's Singles Theodoros VELKOS ~ (5006)
OLYMPIC SPORT EVENT 2004
4 Feb 2004 - 8 Feb 2004 Goudi Olympic Indoor Hall,Athens
Round Scores W/L Opponent Nation
1/16 15/1,15/4 W Christos COUCAS GRE
Quarter-Finals 5/15,5/15 L Hyun II LEE KOR
09-21-2004, 07:23 PM #85
I dont doubt your experience and training jump_smash. However, i do doubt that majority of line judges have similar credential as your. Remember that line judges are under extreme pressure too from eyes of thousands audience plus maybe tv camera. Players nervousness can be shake of after few rallies or 1st game (ie, early mistakes are not detrimental). HOWEVER, line judges are not allowed to make any mistake from the point the umpire says 'love all, play'. All the understanding of the IBF rules are moot if the line judge is nervous. Mistakes tend to foster more nervousness and more mistakes for that line judge because now more eyes are on him/her.
Nervous players can over their nervousness thru feedback/correction while line judges can't as no shuttles would land the same spot or situation within that match. They sit in a chair and can not move about and must act as tho they are calm and alert while the bloods can't get to the brain.LOL
- taufik lost 7 straight points but performed brillantly to win gold
- emms/robertson gave away the first game (1-15) in the gold XD match due to nervousness.
Last edited by cooler; 09-21-2004 at 07:33 PM.