To follow on post#538: 1) It doesn't matter whether it's the player him/herself alone or after receiving an indication from the coach then decides to challenge - still there are only two available, think before you act unless it's clear-cut; 2) With or without linecall review system, if the umpire has reasonable grounds to believe a particular player is using delaying tactic, eg walking around longer than necessary, asking for towel down - simply issue a warning or yellow card if warranted; 3) You cannot be pretty sure it's an error for a shot that landed at the far end near the backline unless it's clearly out by much in which case the linejudge is unlikely to get it wrong in the first place and if it happens then the player's reaction to challenge will be automatic, no need to think; otherwise, when the call is close, the player based on gut feeling or, more importantly, taking into account the match situation (leading or trailing by much, it's only the beginning of G1, there's only one challenge left, it's a crucial point,etc) will want to consider a bit as it is the sensible, wise and natural thing to do before deciding - it won't be an "automatic" decision if by that you mean instant; 4) For sure, BWF will not spend so much money on an expensive, evolving technology mainly to deal with errant linejudges who, intentionally or not, make clearly bad linecalls especially when there are other far less expensive, even costless, or much simpler means of dealing with it, such as the use of TV camera and/or getting the umpire to overrule the said call; 5) By now, I believe, practically everybody is for the use of Hawk-Eye instant-review system despite its present imperfections, shortcomings, and limitations. The best part is the technology will get better over time; we probably won't have to wait very long. I look forward to the day when linejudges can be done away with altogether, completely replaced by technology with Hawk-eye or something better instantly making linecalls. Clearly, it's because the present technology is not nearly perfect that players are hesitant and need to consider in view of the fact that they only have two chances; doing it flippantly (can't afford to) for whatever purpose - to buy time, take a breather, break the opponent's momentum - is I trust not uppermost in the players' minds but getting the point you deserve is. I recall Tai TY's match with LXR, after losing one challenge earlier, TTY dared not make a second challenge when it's obviously a close call; she hesitated a while as shown on TV , then let it go. In another match, Sung JH vs LXR, the former at one point appeared taken aback by the linecall on her backline, turned to look at her coach before finally raising her hand to challenge it but,unfortunately, Hawk-Eye later returned an "IN" outcome, right on the line. 6) Apparently, it is not so much how often linejudges get it terribly wrong but getting it wrong when it's a bit close as to determine the final outcome of the match; otherwise we won't use such an expensive technology despite its imperfections. I venture to say that since the introduction of Hawk-Eye, poor linecalls have become even fewer and far between as linejudges become more on the ball feeling (or,perhaps, fearing?) they come under scrutiny and risk being exposed for their incompetency or bias. Well, Tybalt, it's been a pleasure engaging you in conversation. To each his own,where we differ, we can agree to disagree. Ultimately, I reiterate, what we are after is the highest standards and integrity of the sport we love.
At this moment, I'm inclined to agree with Cheung who hinted that max 5 seconds should be sufficient for the player to decide on challenging the linecall. In ordinary situations, most players would do it within 1 or 2 seconds if not instantly; under unusual or extreme circumstances, up to 5 sec sounds reasonable. The question is, should we keep time or leave it to the discretion of the umpire?
And it can't come quickly enough. You look at how 'pro' tennis is, and then you look at badminton, and it's the sporting equivalent of playing mahjong in an opium den.
What time will a player take to decide before challenging the line-call? . What time will a player take to decide before challenging the line-call? (a) Instantly. When player is sure that the line-call is incorrect. (b) 1-3 seconds; When player is not sure and waiting for instruction from coaches/teammates. (c) 4-6 seconds; When player is not sure and waiting for the reaction from the crowd/spectators watching. .
Seriously, can you imagine the umpires with a stopwatch counting down? I can't. As a reaction to the players reaction to a line call, the umpire should simply ask "Would you like to challenge?" and the response should be an instantaneous yes or no. Nobody is going to sit there with a stopwatch after every point counting down 5 seconds.
There is too much delay in the match when players and coaches are communicating . I voted "No". There is too much delay in the match when players and coaches are communicating. .
I watched the replay of the LD vs SS match, wow, what else I can say. A the G2 mid-game interval, I noticed Wang Zhengming actually saying something to Lin Dan at courtside to which LD responded by nodding his head. Hmm...hard to believe WZM giving LD coaching advice. (Maybe WZM was saying to LD: "If you win the title, I'll buy a koala bear soft toy for you to give to your wife.") GC has to eat back her words too. Right from the start of the match, she was saying Lin Dan was fallible after his comeback, lacking in sharpness, not match fit, his opponents may think he's beatable after his defeat to JOJ at the JPN Open, and suchlike. However,near the end of the match, she was heard gushing in her praise for Lin Dan, paying tribute to him effusively.
As an aside, found this article about Andy Murray, the tennis player, saying allowing only 25 seconds in between points is not enough http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013...me-allowed-between-points/45876/#.U7FFZfmSxAU dated 5th Jan 2013 OTOH, Roger Federer feels 10 seconds is sufficient http://www.tennisnow.com/News/Federer-Speaks-On-Players-Taking-Too-Much-Time-Bet.aspx dated 28 June 2014 Currently, for ATP matches it's 25 sec while Grand Slams allow only 20 sec. Should tennis introduce a shot clock ? http://www.perfect-tennis.co.uk/tennis-introduce-shot-clock/ Here in badminton we are complaining about players wasting time. Btw, I'm not a fan of tennis,I find it boring as compared with badminton. My intention is not to start a debate on tennis and badminton, just to put things in perspective.
Don't worry,I make bold to say badminton will surpass tennis in every way in the foreseeable future, in popularity (which it already is in Asia), in status and even prize money. I am not going to delve into this topic here and at this time, not ripe yet, except to say the most important contributing factor is the rise of the Asian economies.
I totally agree with every word of yours, Devendra. Perhaps people here should start drafting an email to bwf@bwfbadminton.org about this for the benefit of the sport and game-watching-experience of thousands and even millions of viewers. This post of yours could serve as a very good starting point.
Why does Gill need to eat her words when she was basically just stating the facts and her observations. She will only have to eat her words if right from the start she makes a bold prediction that LD will lose which she clearly didn't.
Justin, she only said the same thing that people on badmintoncentral posted as well. Lin Dan had everybody fooled. I watched a repeat of the match. Did Simon crumble or did Lin Dan pile on the pressure so much? I noticed Simon's shots didnt pull Lin Dan around the court so much. Also, Simon had to exert a lot more energy than Lin Dan during the first two sets. Simon lost the first few points of the third set on some errors. This, I think, combined with some mental fatigue and the necessity to maintain his very high rate to play, caused a loss of concentration and loss of rhythm. Lin Dan recognised that and simply kept the pressure on Simon to close out the third game. The only reason I didn't get caught out like you, Kwun and GC is because I was fully engrossed in the match and not logging on to BC!
I agree. In the first and second games, LD kept SS running from back line-to-center-to-back line, while he himself just kept his position in the front. (SS did not dare clear, to get LD also on the back, because clearing to LD is normally not a good idea). At thee third game, SS was slow and LD had time to jump-smash at will. The fact that LD in recent tourneys had not so good results, and was pushed to the limit by ordinary players, is a fact, not an opinion. GC was fair in commenting this match.
For WZM, I think you got it wrong Justin. Wang was not there to give advice to LD, but to learn how to analyse the match and how LD would react to different situations. He was there to learn, not to teach. It is a very sound method.
Wait, wait... so instead of WZM there to provide coaching, he was there to learn something?! We should start a poll to see whether that is even allowed in matches...
Actually I wasn't criticizing GC as she was making a fair comment, I agree. Simply amused that she, like me and kwun, was also fooled by LD at first and forced to back-pedal later - GC literally saying,'How did this man,Lin Dan, do it...". Yeah, WZM was there to learn, not to coach; Gao Huan was often seen doing the same. Sort of on-the-job training exchanging views with and learning from the coach during a live match is more beneficial than reviewing the tape later, I suppose. Players sometimes double up as coaches, I've seen a number of countries do that.
