Calling a foul shot?

well first of all, i think you are in the wrong, how can you say your opponent was at fault, your just another player, not the referee. 2nd, its out anyways, so why must you complain? a point is a point, just accept it, its not like it goes against you.

i think you need to reconsider your attitude towards the game, no one is in position to referee the game play unless you aren't playing yourself and are refereeing the match.

 

That's a bit unfair, why would you not apply the same thought to his opponent who said "I'll let you have that even though you moved". Don't you think that he was in the wrong first?

I hate cocky little b@stards who think they are better than everyone else. Attitude like that makes new players want to quit.

In the end, two wrongs don't make a right but I probably would have answered the same way.

 

http://www.worldbadminton.com/rules/#9

9.2 Once the players are ready for the service, the first forward movement of the server's racket head shall be the start of the service.

9.1.7 the movement of the server's racket shall continue forwards from the start of the service (Law 9.2) until the service is delivered (Law 9.3);

I wud need to see the serve to c if this his service is legal or not

I heard of once again a very good player, ex county player who served by swinging back and slapping the racket on his shirt which made you think he had served and then he made the forward motion. He was making 1 guy so frustrated that he stopped the match and asked for judges and the rules to be got. Ended up the serve was legal but he was so annoyed lol

 

Here we have two faults: the receiver (you) moving before the shuttle is struck, and the server (him) pausing the racket movement between the backswing and the forwards swing.

In most situations, the first fault takes precedence; the second fault does not matter because the shuttle is no longer in play. For example: the shuttle fails to pass the net and begins to fall back down on the striker's side; the opposing player then hits the net with his racket. The latter is not a fault, because the shuttle was out of play.

However, there is a special exception for the serve:

Therefore, in this situation, the correct decision was to play a let. However, this would not be true if you had instead made a fault after he hit the shuttle -- say, you hit the net -- because your fault would not have been "during service"; in this case, only the server would have been faulted, and you would have won the rally.

I would have reacted differently: I would not have apologised, and my response to being patronised in a mini-lecture would have been, shall we say, robust.

I know a few such players -- these old county dogs. They attempt to exert social dominance -- particularly via their greater age and "experience" -- as a way of dominating the game psychologically. It's a subtle tactic, and surprisingly effective. If they can get you to assume a socially submissive role, then you will likely take on a submissive mental attitude when you get out on court.

I have no tolerance for this rubbish; anyone who talks down to me receives short shrift. And it does make a difference on court; don't let these players use mind games against you!

 

well its one point in a match up to 21 points so i wouldnt even bothered to say anything really.

at the end of the day you did move before he served. he probably stopped because he thought about calling you for the foul and then decided not too.
but at club level these days alot of people move before i actually hit the shuttle, i know if im attacking a serve and pre-meditating a low serve it will always be very touch and go whether i move as they hit the shuttle or just before.

but in club standard is there any point of calling these silly fouls?

alot of players that are 'good' will always try to make an excuse and say you've played a foul shot when actually u've just played a good shot to beat them.

i played in an england ranking tournament recently, and i played a net shot where i had to cut underneath the shuttle, kind of like a J shape. and the shuttle spun and dropped tight to the net. and the guy said 'did u hit it twice?'........ i was like WTF? no u idiot i just hit a GOOD SHOT! now give me the shuttle.

 

As far as i know, the serve should be one continous forward motion.
If that's what he did, then he's right.

 

In these cases, I present the other cheek, and just walk away. I do not play to put up with annoying behaviour, and replying in kind is usually just oil in the fire.

No matter who did whatever wrong, being unfriendly or condescending to anyone in any sports situation is just bad sportsmanship. It is always possible to be friendly and gentleman-like, and never any use to be different.

IMO, this holds even for higher ranked tournaments. There will be an umpire, and you'll probably not be able to argue against his decision anyway. So staying calm and all around friendly seems to be the best bet.

 

That is no longer correct. There is now also a rule about the backswing:

There's also a video by Badminton England about service faults that mentions this specific fault (pausing between backswing and forwards swing).

 

Well, it's good to get an update on this matter. thanks, Gollum.
Where do you play, btw?

 

Ebbisham in Epsom, mainly.

 

This is a different fault (and would have been a fault under the old rules too).

That's a good point. It's good not to be the person who changes the tone from friendly to argumentative.

A lot depends not on what was said, but how it was said. If this kind of situation comes up, I generally match the tone of the other person: if he was stern and schoolmasterly, I would be the same in my reply; if he said it in a friendly way, my criticism of his serve would be equally friendly.

 

Just as a clarification, there is no requirement for the service to be smooth and at the same speed. I do know many players who change the speed of the forward motion even though it is still continuous, especially for flick serves.

And, while you're right that badminton is not something to get upset about, I can't stand attitude like that regardless of where I see or am subjected to it. I am, in all honesty, the best player at my club but while I would prefer to play a very good competitive game with the other better players, if I'm assked to play by those that are not so good I will do so (especially if one of them is my wife....).

 

I feel that your personal conduct is fine. I think general etiquette states that a player is allowed to call shots they can see. For example, if your opponent hits the net with his racket, it is hard for you, on this side, to be able to see whether his racket or the shuttle hit the net, therefore it is not your call. However, when it is something you can see clearly such as a service fault or foot fault, etc, it's perfectly fine for you to call it. Just like you call outs on their shots--because you can see where the shuttle landed a lot more easily than your opponent can.

 

Calling foul shots in social games I think are everyones responsibility, the only exceptions being when a person clearly can't see what's happening.

I played a doubles game a couple of weeks ago where my opponents clearly had a double hit and while I'm not sure if the first guy who hit it was aware of it (was almost behind him at the time), the second player clearly knew it was already touched once but tried to continue play. I just stopped and said "double hit", they didn't argue so he knew he was in the wrong but was hoping we didn't notice. The funny thing is that in competition, there's nothing wrong with this as it's the umpires job to call faults, if he makes a mistake to your advantage then that's just part of the game. In social play, there is no tournament at stake and you should always call all the faults as you see them.

This is obviously just my opinion but I don't let anyone get away with obvious faults, my partners included.

 

Of course, the solution, then, is to get to the skill level where you can kick his butt and tell him, "I don't believe we're on the same level."

 

Interesting, I never heard of this before. Perhaps we're just ruder on this side of the world?

Seriously, though, in a social game you'd normally give people the benefit of the doubt. After all, you're supposed to be playing for enjoyment, so there's no sense interrupting the game to start an argument. But if someone is doing something blatantly illegal (e.g. hitting the net and trying to pretend it didn't happen) I don't see a problem with pointing it out.

(Unfortunately, what you describe isn't so clear-cut--hard to say that either party was definitely in the wrong without being there to see it. But if he was the first to comment, as you say, then it's a bit rich for him to lecture you on etiquette afterwards.)