since we r discussing on the (new) law, i hope to seek the experts to clear my doubt(s) on some sections of the law... 9.1.5 the whole shuttle shall be below the server’s waist ... an imaginary line round the body, level with the lowest part of the server’s bottom rib; my understanding of rib is only to the rib cage. dunno if bottom rib is the bottom of rib cage (arnd the highest pt of 6 packs)... does not sound correct to me. where is the 'bottom rib'? or should i just stay safe with the traditional 'waist' level... (in my own definition, the shorts level or mayb level where u can feel ur own waist bones) ------------------------------------ 13.3.8 is hit twice in succession by the same player. However, a shuttle hitting the head and the stringed area of the racket in one stroke shall not be a ‘fault’; eg. when i receive a smash, i can hear and feel that the bird bounced twice on my stringed area... am i faulted on double hit even though i was hitting the bird in, technically 'one stroke'? --------------------------------------- and it seems that when shuttle is not in play, advices r allowed from coaches, as long as player is not leaving the court, and the next rally (serve) has not started... as opposed to advices given before next game during old law days. "16.5.1 Only when the shuttle is not in play (Law 15), shall a player be permitted to receive advice during a match."
Is there a doctor in the house? http://www.studentxpress.ie/educ/biology/bio5a.html http://tosaweb.ncsd.k12.wy.us/faculty/lbell/Human Skeleton/human_skeleton_index.html.html these picture does show the lowest part of the rib is at a similar height to the elbow joint (although I don't know how true that is for everyone)
I hope you find Neil's "Skeleton" pic useful as I did. And indeed the guide that "the lowest part of the bottom rib" is at almost the same level as the elbow in the pic, although it has to be true that there are always exceptions. Your version of the "traditional waist" level (presumably using the shorts as a guide) is arbitrary and unlikely find favour with the service judge. I remember in one of the international Opens last year, in a XD match, the woman partner from China was faulted so many times for serving above the waist that she tried to influence the SJ by tucking her shirt inside her shorts, but still she was faulted. Maybe her shorts were pulled too high , but normally it is the level at which the shuttle was struck that determines whether a service fault has occured. Many players are unable to see for themselves that they have hit the shuttle higher than waist level (bottom rib) especially when they try to capitalize by serving at the highest point possible to execute a flatter serve. It is good to video your serve during training so that you can see for yourself and make corrections if necessary. But of course sometimes the SJ can err also as he/she is human. So try not to present an opportunity for the SJ to call a fault service against you.
Yes now there is help from their coaches for the players during a game, especially for those who are not doing well and seem to have no answer to their opponents' winning strategy. But such advice can only be given when the "shuttle is NOT in play" as defined in the Laws. Players do not need to wait till the intervals to obtain advice or tips. That's why now you see their coaches sitting close behind their court to enable the player to turn around and listen to instructions from their coaches. But they can't step outside the court without the umpire's permission and the umpire may even yellow card a coach for given advice when the rally is still on. A red card will see the coach being sent away into the gallery. Under the old Law 16.6.1, Except in the intervals provided in Laws 16.2 (Intervals not exceeding 90 seconds (now 120 sec) between the first and second games and not exceeding 5 minutes (now 120 sec or 2 min) between the second and third games). However, an addition to the new Law 16.2.1 allows an official interval "not exceeding 60 seconds during each game when the leading score reaches 11 points". This is also to allow TV commercials to be aired in addition to the other official intervals.
i cannot thank u guys enough for your explaination and contribution. involving in badminton really makes us lawyers and doctors i guess "slung shot" (i think that is what i experienced) is technically legal... as long as it is "in one stroke". (but it could be debatable) -------------------------------------------- yes, i did read on the issue u mentioned abt the china girl (zhang yawen) http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=36383&highlight=waist+rib while searching for ribs... while "bottom ribs" is near elbow level, definitely higher than the "shorts level", why is ZYW faulted 11 times? ------------------------------------------------ btw, with 9.1.6 the shaft of the server’s racket at the instant of hitting the shuttle shall be pointing in a downward direction; (see pic on this thread) http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34241&highlight=waist+rib with reference to the pic provided on the thread, it seems that the racket head can b higher than the "whole of the server’s hand holding the racket" but... if 9.1.6 is violated, how does the service judge indicate the fault? is it the same gesture as the "above the serving hand" hand signal?
No. No. No. A slung shot (whether in one stroke or not) is illegal under law 13.3.7 which says: "13 It shall be a fault: ... 13.3 if in play, the shuttle: ... 13.3.7 is caught and held on the racket and then slung during the execution of a stroke; "
thank you CWB001, for your clarification. (clear as crystal) i am still a bit confused with the line: 13.3.8 is hit twice in succession by the same player. However, a shuttle hitting the head and the stringed area of the racket in one stroke shall not be a ‘fault’; can anyone give an example (or two) on how shot(s) "shall not be faulted" with the line being applied? thanks!!
It is really quite simple. If a player strikes the shuttle twice it is ALWAYS a fault (whether it is accidental or deliberate, one stroke or more) UNLESS the two hits occur in one stoke AND the hits are: one on the strings and one on the racquet frame.
1. ZYW was faulted 11 times because the "trained" Service Judge deemed so. You may be right to assume that her "shorts level" is lower than her elbow but it is at that particular instant of striking the shuttle that counts. Obviously, she must have struck the shuttle higher! The SJ must have been watching her very closely to make sure that at the moment of striking the shuttle, the point of contact was above her waist (lowest rib). Despite earlier fault service calls, she persisted to serve almost the same way as before. I guess it was very difficult to change her service on the spot. But I think she must have refined her service thereafter as I think she experienced less service faults than before, if any. 2. Law 9.1.6 The hand holding the racket has to point downward to make sure that the racket shaft and head also point downward. If the player is doing this correctly, then there is no way that the racket head can be higher than the hand. Players shoud be mindful not to point their racket shaft sideways (instead of in a downward direction) to avoid being faulted as the racket head could then be higher than the hand at contact. There is a picture of this fault showing the SJ stretching out his right hand in front of him with bended elbow and an open palm held at about 90 degrees pointing towards the court.
actually, many of today's players commit fault but still get away with it.. Some net taps are over the net and some serves are above the waistline.. the problem is, these things happen too fast and human eyes have their limits.. umpire finds it difficult to make a decision on the spot unless there is video replay many times..
Agree, that's why they say "To err is human". But if it happens, it is not fair to the player wrongly faulted. Sometimes it will mean winning or losing the match. I think the BWF realised this weakness and is probably trying to find a better system. I don't know whether they could dispense with line and service judges altogether (probably not) but appropriate mechanical/electronic devices may be needed to assist decision making, as they probably have in tennis. For example, at the umpire's chair, they could instal a mini TV device that can show whether the shuttle has crossed the net before it is being hit or whether the net has been touched. But I think whatever it is, we will still have some problems either with the system once a while or in implementing it as human beings are also involved. There is also the question of delays in playing back the scene if required. Constant interruptions are not good for any game and may eventually drive spectators away.
badminton is same as football.. sometimes a penalty is given for wrong reason but no penalty is given for correct reason.. in badminton, no foul is given although the player commits a fault.. Is there any example of a foul is wrongly given although the player does not commit a fault?? Interesting to know as well..
Oh, I mean example of these players.. Maybe LCW vs BCL at WC2006?? LCW was not satisfied at the line call..
