User Tag List

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 17 of 85
  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Net blocking / distraction

    Can I get a ruling on holding ones racket still above the net?

    I can see it as obstruction and was under the impression that in order for the "hit" to count, there must have been observable forward motion.

    Thanks

  2. #2
    Regular Member visor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    9,515
    Mentioned
    115 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    You can hold it there but if the shuttle hits your racket on the opponent's side of the net, then it's a fault, so why bother...

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Dubai, United Arab Emirates, U
    Posts
    187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In situations like that, if you just hit the opponents racket with your own racket, the point goes to you.
    You dont even have to touch the shuttle.
    Its a cheap way to get points, BUT the opponent deserves it anyway, for holding his racket up there , in the first place !

  4. #4
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,748
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow You can block the SHOT, but you cannot block/obstruct the STROKE

    Quote Originally Posted by PyourK View Post

    Can I get a ruling on holding one's racket still above the net?

    I can see it as obstruction and was under the impression that in order for the "hit" to count, there must have been observable forward motion.

    Thanks.

    .
    Hi PyourK,

    Care has to be taken to explain this.

    Firstly, we have to define "SHOT" and "STROKE".

    SHOT = Flight of the shuttle.
    STROKE = Swing of the racket.

    You can block the SHOT, but you cannot block/obstruct the STROKE.

    If the shuttle is very close to the net, then there are 2 relevant laws here;
    (1) Your opponent must hit the shuttle with the point of impact on his/her side of the court.
    (2) Your opponent is allowed to have his/her racket head to follow through over the net into your side of the court.

    If your racket head is so close to the net that it prevented your opponent from doing the follow-through with his/her racket head over the net into your side of the court, then it is illegal.

    Usually the umpire makes the decision by judging whether the rackets will clash or not.

    My advice is... still block the shot, but block it further away from the net, so that no clash of rackets can occur. It is then a LEGAL BLOCK. But it's easier said than done.

    Cheers... chris-ccc
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 04-05-2010 at 01:18 AM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    83
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    No, it is not allowed. That's the simple answer. The ONLY incident where you are allowed to invade your opponent's airspace is during the occasions whence you have struck the shuttle on your side of the court and need to follow through with your racquet.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    sorry, I asked my question wrong.

    the racket is not above the net, but rather just behind it, in an almost parallel fashion.

    Needless to say, I am reluctant to clash rackets, as you never know what would happen, what if your racket breaks? what if his racket breaks?

    "if"s aside, I am under the impression that in order for one's shot to count, you must have made forward movement with the racket. just holding it still on your side does not really cut it. Moreover, it serves to be some sort of distraction, as it prevents one from doing a swipe shot if I treasure my racket. It also seems rather amateurish, as I dont see this happen in higher level games.

    correct me if i'm wrong. thanks.

  7. #7
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,748
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow Net blocking/distraction

    Quote Originally Posted by PyourK View Post

    ...... I am under the impression that in order for one's shot to count, you must have made forward movement with the racket. just holding it still on your side does not really cut it. Moreover, it serves to be some sort of distraction, as it prevents one from doing a swipe shot if I treasure my racket. It also seems rather amateurish, as I don't see this happen in higher level games.

    correct me if I'm wrong. thanks.

    .
    Perhaps answering different questions separately will give a clearer explanation.

    Question 1: Can I make no movement with the racket to return a shot?
    Answer: Yes, you can make no movement with the racket to return a shot. It's called 'blocking the shot'. But you must not interfere with your opponent's stroke.

    Question 2: Give an example when 'blocking the shot' can be used.
    Answer: You can block all shots coming at you at anytime if your opponent's stroke is not obstructed by you.
    Example: You are stuck very close to the net and you lifted the shuttlecock high up to the back lines of your opponent's court. Your opponent moved to the back and is going to smash at you. Being stuck very close to the net, and knowing that a smash is coming at you, you raise your racket-head above the net in anticipation of the smash. This happens often and it is a legal block.
    Note: You have not disturbed with the stroke production of your opponent.

    Question 3: Give an example when 'blocking the shot' is considered illegal.
    Answer: 'Blocking the shot' is always legal. It is interfering with your opponent's stroke that is illegal.
    Example: You are stuck very close to the net and you played a net return just over the net to your opponent's court. Your opponent moved in to return your shot. Being stuck very close to the net, and knowing that a return is coming, you raise your racket-head above the net in anticipation. This happens often in play, but now it is an illegal block.
    Note: Here, you have disturbed with the stroke production of your opponent. Your opponent is required to hit the shuttlecock on his/her side of the court, but he/she is allowed to have his/her follow-through of the racket-head over the net to your side of the court. This is what I meant about:

    You can block the SHOT, but you cannot block/obstruct the STROKE.
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 04-05-2010 at 10:15 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    re:
    Question 3:
    Give an example when 'blocking the shot' is considered illegal.
    Answer: 'Blocking the shot' is always legal. It is interfering with your opponent's stroke that is illegal.
    Example: You are stuck very close to the net and you played a net return just over the net to your opponent's court. Your opponent moved in to return your shot. Being stuck very close to the net, and knowing that a return is coming, you raise your racket-head above the net in anticipation. This happens often in play, but now it is an illegal block.

    Am I right in saying that the illegal part about this question is that his racket crossed the vertical plane that is the net? so as long as his entire racket is on his side of the court, this is fine?

    I still find it distracting for his racket to be there motionless, as it serves as a deterrant as to somewhat discourage me to do a straight lift. thus effectively limiting the shots that I would be able to respond with.

    this has happened, and the shuttle has hit his racket, however the return was so weak that the followup drop to the other side won the point.

  9. #9
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,748
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow The follow-through of the stroke can cross over the net

    Quote Originally Posted by PyourK View Post

    Am I right in saying that the illegal part about this question is that his racket crossed the vertical plane that is the net? so as long as his entire racket is on his side of the court, this is fine?

    .
    Question: Where can I return/hit the shuttlecock?
    Answer: As long as the shuttlecock is returned from your side of the court, it is legal.

    But remember: The follow-through of the stroke can cross over the net.
    .

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    here is a quote from another thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Tony2504 View Post
    It is eactly because of what is said about a quick return would defeat this move that makes such a move pointless as legitimate play - it is nothing more than a move to distract an opponet. According to the rules, distracting an opponent when he/she is trying to play a shot is a fault. The same can be said when a plyer makes a noise when an opponet is playing or attemptiong to play a shot.

    this poster tends to agree that the intention is jsut to distract/obstruct the opponent from executing a straight lift, in fear of the guy getting lucky w/ the "block"

    notice block and obstruction is, in my opinion, the same thing, just different wording.


    one more thing to clarify, if the opponent's racket is close enough to the net, i could just dink my racket onto his with no intention of hitting the shuttle and still win the point? or do i have to hit the shuttle and then hit his racket?

  11. #11
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,748
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow What is considered as distracting our opponent(s) during a rally?

    Quote Originally Posted by PyourK View Post

    this poster tends to agree that the intention is just to distract/obstruct the opponent from executing a straight lift, in fear of the guy getting lucky w/ the "block"

    notice block and obstruction is, in my opinion, the same thing, just different wording.

    .
    We will need to start a new thread; like: What is considered as distracting our opponent(s) during a rally?
    .

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Taken from the laws of badminton


    FAULTS
    It shall be a "fault":
    ...
    13.4.4 obstructs an opponent, i.e. prevents an opponent from making a legal stroke where the shuttle is followed over the net;

    13.4.5 deliberately distracts an opponent by any action such as shouting or making gestures;


    Can it not be argued that him placing his racket there prevents one from "making a legal stroke"?

    I would think that I could argue with :if I have to hit his racket and risk causing damage to either player's racket makes me "unable to execute this shot"

    *EDIT*
    to expand, I find it entirely annoying that they are trying to risk their racket to break yours, effectively making you give up a kill shot. I also find it kind of cheap.
    Last edited by PyourK; 04-05-2010 at 03:03 PM.

  13. #13
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    5,436
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think you should relax a little.

    For one, it is fairly rare that a net kill that your opponent is also at the net when you both are very close to the net (unless your opponent is not very good and keeps returning net shots with net shots when you are on the net. In this case you are going to win those point, thus be happy!)

    Secondly, if you are going to hit the opponent or his racket on your follow through, then you cn warn them, but if not ajust your stroke, so instead of doing a kill an follow through, make it more of a pull back and brush. Even though you will lose power, he still won't get it as his racket is on the net & the shuttle will have gone past.

    And if it annoys you that much, get an old metal racket & hammer it when he does it next, smashing his Arcsaber/Nanospeed/Amortec rcket into many peices....

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesd20 View Post
    I think you should relax a little.

    For one, it is fairly rare that a net kill that your opponent is also at the net when you both are very close to the net (unless your opponent is not very good and keeps returning net shots with net shots when you are on the net. In this case you are going to win those point, thus be happy!)

    Secondly, if you are going to hit the opponent or his racket on your follow through, then you cn warn them, but if not ajust your stroke, so instead of doing a kill an follow through, make it more of a pull back and brush. Even though you will lose power, he still won't get it as his racket is on the net & the shuttle will have gone past.

    And if it annoys you that much, get an old metal racket & hammer it when he does it next, smashing his Arcsaber/Nanospeed/Amortec rcket into many peices....
    haha, I just want clarifications, I'm by no means tense.
    I would agree with you; if it was singles.

    imagine this happening in doubles after, say a cross court drop from his partner, well placed enough that a cross-court is risky (could be due to my not so high skill level) A block like that seems to be very restricting in the the returns that are available to choose from, and thus, quite annoying. blocking the shot that hasn't even been played yet.

  15. #15
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    5,436
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In that situation one of the last shots you would be thinking would be a cross court net, to ifficult to control.

    The most likely shot (asuming the shot was good, would be a straight lift (flat or high depending on quality), or if the drop is very poor, then a net shot/block.

    I think maybe the opponent is standing there because you are playing that net shot even when the drop is good, so he can get the easy kill?

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesd20 View Post
    In that situation one of the last shots you would be thinking would be a cross court net, to ifficult to control.

    The most likely shot (asuming the shot was good, would be a straight lift (flat or high depending on quality), or if the drop is very poor, then a net shot/block.

    I think maybe the opponent is standing there because you are playing that net shot even when the drop is good, so he can get the easy kill?
    like you said, you would be wanting to do a straight lift. but thats where his racket is, so you could be lifting right into his kill. Am i making sense? if not, the lift would be too steep and too shallow.

  17. #17
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,748
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow You can block the SHOT, but you cannot block/obstruct the STROKE

    Quote Originally Posted by PyourK View Post

    Taken from the laws of badminton

    FAULTS
    It shall be a "fault":
    if, in play, a player:
    ...
    13.4.4 obstructs an opponent, i.e. prevents an opponent from making a legal stroke where the shuttle is followed over the net

    Can it not be argued that him placing his racket there prevents one from "making a legal stroke"?

    .
    That's exactly what I was saying: It is a fault because he placed his racket there to obstruct your stroke.

    Tell your opponent:
    You can block the SHOT, but you cannot block/obstruct the STROKE.
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post

    Firstly, we have to define "SHOT" and "STROKE".

    SHOT = Flight of the shuttle.
    STROKE = Swing of the racket.

    You can block the SHOT, but you cannot block/obstruct the STROKE.


Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Net blocking
    By jwu42 in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 39
    : 09-22-2011, 07:51 PM
  2. Distraction
    By DeadlyDuck in forum Techniques / Training
    Replies: 7
    : 03-30-2009, 03:05 AM
  3. Blocking
    By bad_fanatic in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 16
    : 12-03-2007, 11:11 PM
  4. Distraction for players during matches
    By chorlaw in forum Singapore Open 2007 / Indonesia Open 2007
    Replies: 44
    : 05-09-2007, 11:32 PM
  5. Blocking
    By neilpais in forum General Forum
    Replies: 3
    : 05-08-2002, 09:42 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
  •