User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 18 to 27 of 27
  1. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SF Bayarea, CA
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    #2 is B, because the bird is still in play, when the opponent hits the net. Law 15.6.1

    #3 is C, since the bird did not get over the net, the bird was not in play (the rally was already over) when opponent touched the net. So touching the net was not fault. Law 17.2

    I just copy them from the book. Once again, the book is from 1996. So, feel free to correct me if it is outdated.
    Last edited by e_rat; 09-22-2009 at 12:44 AM.

  2. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SF Bayarea, CA
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Case #4

    In a double match, a player swings at and misses the shuttle. His swing carries his racket head over the net into his opponents' court space. Before the shuttle hits the floor behind him, his partner swats in over the net for an apparent winner. What is the call?

  3. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    manila
    Posts
    1,117
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by e_rat View Post
    Case #4

    In a double match, a player swings at and misses the shuttle. His swing carries his racket head over the net into his opponents' court space. Before the shuttle hits the floor behind him, his partner swats in over the net for an apparent winner. What is the call?
    If the thrown racket hits any of the the opposite players, it's already an obstruction. Therefore, the umpire should call a let.

    If the thrown racket did not obstruct in anyway, the point should be awarded to the striker.

    Did I get it right?

  4. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Kiwiland
    Posts
    84
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    #4:

    The point is awarded to the defender (i.e. the other side) because the racket of the attacker is not allowed over the net into the opponent's space. Doesn't matter if his partner swatted it over again after it, the point is already awarded.

    to venkatesh: He meant the racket swing and miss but carried over the net but the racket is still in his hand, it's just the head over the net to the opposite side.

    Next!!!

  5. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maidstone, KENT
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    #4:
    I think the point is awarded to the attacker because it's legal to follow through over the net - it's just not legal to strike the shuttle before it crosses the net (although does it count as a follow-through if you missed the shuttle? - not sure).
    Anyway, I think RocKai is wrong and the attacker wins...

  6. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Kiwiland
    Posts
    84
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    First:
    A player may let his racquet cross over the net in his or her follow-through on a shot.

    Second:
    It's a fault if a player touches the net or its supports with racket, person or dress, invades an opponent's court over the net with racket or person except as permitted.

    Hmm therefore I think it didn't count as a follow through because he didn't hit the bird.

  7. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    405
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by petert1401 View Post
    #4:
    I think the point is awarded to the attacker because it's legal to follow through over the net
    I thought so too, but I looked it up: rule 13.4.2 says it's a fault if

    ...invades an opponentís court over the net with racket or person except that the striker may follow the shuttle over the net with the racket in the course of a stroke after the initial point of contact with the shuttle is on the strikerís side of the net;
    Since the player in this case didn't make contact with the shuttle, it looks like this rule applies and it's a fault. Surprising, but there it is.

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by e_rat View Post
    Besides badminton, I play golf too. Maybe, you all know there are so many rules in golf. In contrast, badminton rule was much simpler. Here is something I want to share with you all.

    I read this case from the book, "Badminton", by Steven Boga. Published by Stackpole Books, ISBN 0-8117-2487-5

    During a fast-paced rally, a player, not realizing the shuttle will land well out of bounds, drives the bird down her right sideline. It travels below the net level to the right of the net pole and lands in the back corner of the opponent's court. What is the call?

    a. Award the rally to the striking player
    b. Award the rally to the defending player
    c. Call a let


    (Let: Any exchange or rally that is replayed.)

    I was amazed what the answer is. I will give out the answer next week. If you interested, there are few more cases that I can share.
    i know in tennis the player will get a applause for making that shot.

  9. #26
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SF Bayarea, CA
    Posts
    21
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Once again, answer from the book
    #4 the attacker is fault

    The racket can get over the net if it is the follow trough after hitting the birdie. But, the player in the front did not hit the birdie, so it is fault.

  10. #27
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Kiwiland
    Posts
    84
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you Mr e_rat.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 3
    : 12-22-2011, 03:52 AM
  2. Interesting table tennis game
    By Bbn in forum Badminton Tournament Video Sharing
    Replies: 5
    : 01-09-2007, 07:01 AM
  3. Interesting Study - Talent
    By blckknght in forum Professional Players
    Replies: 8
    : 05-11-2006, 09:12 AM
  4. Interesting IBF rule
    By silentheart in forum General Forum
    Replies: 10
    : 03-07-2006, 04:53 PM
  5. Clarification required about a rule of the game.
    By Ramesh in forum General Forum
    Replies: 7
    : 04-22-2002, 08:32 PM

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
  •