Results 52 to 68 of 74
Thread: Net kills - what's legal?
05-09-2005, 06:45 AM #52Originally Posted by Mag
05-09-2005, 08:23 AM #53Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
THE POINT: Why discuss a rule interpretation that is impossible to umpire? Or, to put it differently: it is irrelevant whether #4 is legal or not, because using any other interpretation of 13.3 than that the initial point of contact is what matters would mean that no human could make a correct call.
Determining on which side initial point of contact occurred is hard enough, without the benefit of a replay.
05-09-2005, 08:54 AM #54Originally Posted by hcyong
05-09-2005, 09:13 AM #55
You're talking about enforcement of the laws.
I thought we were talking about the letter of the law.
Back to Gollum for the philosphy question then.
If nobody sees the fault happen, did it really happen?
05-09-2005, 10:16 AM #56Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
Kicking solipsists out the way like the scum that they are, then yes the tree did fall and the fault did occur. But the event is unintersting in itself; it only acquires meaning through its relations to our values.
So the tree fell, but if no-one cares about trees, then it doesn't matter. Philosophers are in disagreement over whether squirrels get a vote, but the issues of animal and alien minds can be discussed independently and are therefore not germane.
The following are three mutually distinct but related issues: the letter of the law; the interpretation of the law; and the enforcement of the law. Judging cases such as this is difficult, because it requires consideration of all three and how they are connected. Isolation of any one element will lead to a spurious conclusion - because it is a conclusion out of context.
None of that helps resolve the question; philosophy once again proves that its virtue is not solving problems, but posing them.
For me, this thread has demonstrated that opinion on this matter is divided, with no clear ruling either way.
05-09-2005, 10:51 AM #57Originally Posted by Gollum
According to the "Classical" laws of physics, it is a fault.
People care about the rule but most of people can not tell if it is carry over or this topic we are talking about here
To enforce this rule, we need a camera which fix on the net, not the pretty girl in the stand. Also, a Deep Blue will also help to recreate the shot in 3D pictures.
Last edited by silentheart; 05-09-2005 at 10:58 AM.
05-09-2005, 02:54 PM #58Originally Posted by Gollum
05-09-2005, 03:19 PM #59Originally Posted by Loopy
05-10-2005, 03:40 AM #60Originally Posted by Gollum
05-10-2005, 05:13 AM #61Originally Posted by Gollum
05-10-2005, 05:34 AM #62Originally Posted by cooler
Because cameras are not used in this way, the rules can be vague. If cameras ARE used in this way, the rules will need to be changed to give an explicit verdict.
05-13-2005, 06:19 PM #63
I just had to revive this thread.
In the match between Mi Zhou and Ruina Going in 2003, the judge called an error. But I think it was pretty unfair. So much for video judging eh?
I extracted the video scene. Take it here, it's less than 5 megs.
And here if the bandwith has been surpassed.
05-13-2005, 08:57 PM #64Originally Posted by Loopy
can u post a frame capture photo?
05-13-2005, 09:16 PM #65
I just tried and it seen ok. Wait for a few seconds... I have to wait for about 5 sec before the save window came up.
05-14-2005, 03:45 AM #66
thanks, it worked this this time.
the stroke looked ok to me on my first watch.
when i zoom in, it clearly show the cork had passed the net plane and mi zhou racket is still 1.5 to 2 feet away. It was a bad call by the umpire.
05-14-2005, 04:10 AM #67
pic 1: cork just enter mi zhou side while her racket is still 1.5 to 2 feet away
pic 2: moment just before mi zhou strike shuttle. About 75% of shuttlecock is already on mi zhou side, cork facing toward mi zhou
pic 3: moment after mi zhou strike shuttlecock with cork turning away from mi zhou. the freeze frame capture cork intersect the plane of the net (cork is facing away from umpire/camera)
the umpire was wrong even when he had the best view.
Last edited by cooler; 05-14-2005 at 04:21 AM.
05-14-2005, 06:48 PM #68
Nice capture cooler.
I agree also, the umpire made a bad call. The commentators said it too, alrthough in a more brit manner.
By CkcJsm in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 11: 02-26-2009, 09:00 PM
By aquaboi in forum Chit-ChatReplies: 10: 03-27-2008, 12:36 PM
By Jumpalot in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 10: 08-04-2005, 08:00 PM
By oab729 in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 6: 04-22-2005, 12:13 PM
By Jessica in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 6: 12-04-2001, 11:51 AM