Results 69 to 85 of 85
Thread: Net blocking / distraction
12-07-2012, 12:34 PM #69
09-18-2013, 11:52 PM #70
Want to briefly revive this thread with a most recent net block by Marc Zwiebler
Fantastic luck for Zwiebler to place his racket in the exact spot and a target for Tago to unconsciously smash at!
Tago was obviously shocked and tried to protest to the umpire that Zwiebler had blocked his stroke or had obstructed him in some way. But seeing as Tago did a jump smash a couple feet behind the service line, there was no way Zwiebler could have been close enough to physically obstruct Tago.
There is obviously a more clear answer in this case as it is not as controversial as other moments in the past. I just decided to post it here because I found it amusing that Tago tried to call out Zwiebler for obstructing him.
Enjoy the clip!
09-19-2013, 12:03 AM #71
^ Tks! Yeah, I saw that too. Incredible luck!
Zwiebler was down one game, and down 18-19 second game. And this helped him extend to rubber game. I think the shuttle hit Zwiebler racket's frame and just dinked over half court. Truly a never say die attitude.
09-25-2013, 07:53 AM #72
Totally legal and nothing wrong with net blocking - as long as shuttle has crossed the net and it isn't obstructing your opponents on the other side
If you're feeling lucky and daring to try something different, then by all means.
If you think about it, the racquet head is extremely small, and for the shuttle to hit the sweetspot at over 300km/h from such a distance is really something...
09-26-2013, 07:21 PM #73
12-09-2013, 07:14 PM #74
12-10-2013, 02:21 AM #75
as Marc didn't complain, it was probably ok and he wasn't obstructed with his stroke.
12-10-2013, 07:29 AM #76
If you look at 4.37 onward Marc looks at the umpire a couple times before passing shuttle back and after with a wry smile because he doesn't agree and he's like - serious your not calling that.
Why do you think he wasn't obstructed? their rackets were crazy close together, there is a massive chance Marc was obstructed, he could have had to stop his racket short (as a natural reaction to seeing a racket go up in his way). The only thing LCW has got going for him is that he raised his racket late therefore giving the impression that he was not blocking so harder for the umpire.
Last edited by craigandy; 12-10-2013 at 07:41 AM.
12-10-2013, 07:56 AM #77
Honestly speaking, I don't believe he was obstructed anyway.
As I see it (which is hard from the video...), Marc didn't follow through over the net anyways, therefore LCW cannot obstruct him.
12-10-2013, 08:27 AM #78
Don't really understand the philosophy at the root of the rule. Is it a safety thing? Or is it that they think it ruins the integrity of the rally(unfair) by just being able to block up really close not allowing the shuttle to pass.
If at the root is safety then I can understand why examples like this do not get called.
If at the root it was the integrity(fairness) of the rally then I think examples like these need to be called every time. Like in golf and a staked tree, if you can make a swing to hit the tree then free drop even if it is not the swing you would make.
12-10-2013, 08:34 AM #79
12-10-2013, 10:32 AM #80
as long as you don't
3. wrong. as long as he's far enough (or the shuttle is deep enough...), it is allowed to raise your racket in order to block him. this may irritate him, his problem!
12-10-2013, 10:07 PM #81
I would have faulted LCW's action straight away
If I were the umpire, I would have faulted LCW's action straight away.
As I am coaching and playing with my trainees, lots of arguments have arisen about this matter.
I now tell them this:
Whenever 2 players are playing at the net, challenging each other in 'netplay' returns; a fault will be called immediately as soon as one player raises his/her racket-head to prevent his/her opponent's 'Swipe' stroke.
What is the 'Swipe' stroke? I have defined it here:
12-11-2013, 11:59 AM #82
12-12-2013, 04:01 AM #83
you're right that the opponent must have the possibility to follow his stroke over the net.
if i allow him to do so, i may put my racket whereever i want...
12-12-2013, 09:50 AM #84
yes! you are right! of course you always must do everything what you can an what is ALLOWED to get the shuttlecock! look at the example in the Video (Marc Zwiebler): He just holt his racket still in the direction of the shot whithout interfere his opponent. It was pure luck that his Opponent smashes the shuttle exactly on his racket. Maybe when his opponent has made a "kill" at the net and he holds his racket like this, the umpire will call it as an interferance ... its sometimes a fine line between a fault and "its allowed" ...
12-12-2013, 10:18 AM #85
of course i try to block the shuttle if it is allowed to do so...
By jwu42 in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 39: 09-22-2011, 08:51 PM
By DeadlyDuck in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 7: 03-30-2009, 04:05 AM
By bad_fanatic in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 16: 12-04-2007, 12:11 AM
By chorlaw in forum Singapore Open 2007 / Indonesia Open 2007Replies: 44: 05-10-2007, 12:32 AM
By neilpais in forum General ForumReplies: 3: 05-08-2002, 10:42 PM