[another] fault at net

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by psyclops, Jul 27, 2019.

  1. psyclops

    psyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    ger
    There is the explanation of the umpire at this fault in the net play during one recent MS match - http://bit.ly/2yeX3TL



    Would this be considered a misinterpretation of the law?

    The 'fact' as ruled by the umpire does not match what cameras show.

    If you were a service judge, would you assist the umpire? If not, why not?

    Getting the call correct is critical; anything else is just hand waving; which incidentally is seen in this match.

    If this situation is to be used as a learning opportunity, what, exactly, are the considerations in arriving at the correct decision?
     
    #1 psyclops, Jul 27, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2019
  2. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    294
    Location:
    Norway
    I saw that and it also buffles me why she thought there was an obstruction by Chou. It looked rather like it was Anders who did all the obstruction and also invaded opponent's court...

    Unfortunately there is not much to do in the situation... If she saw an obstruction, this is final and I don't know how could you explain her misunderstanding of the law there... But no service judge nor referee can change what an umpire saw... Also the video replay cannot be used to change umpire's call in badminton...
     
  3. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,154
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    This umpire unfortunately is prone to brain farts (and really fortunately there aren't many like her) ... she totally reversed the situation, adding salt to the wounds, penalizing the victim instead of the perpetrator. She had unfortunately made another glaring error in another tournament, NZ I think.

    Imho, the service judge should've stepped in and corrected it. Chou being nice as he is just accepted it without arguing more. But if it was LD, there would be hell raised all the way to the referee.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
     
    LenaicM likes this.
  4. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    294
    Location:
    Norway
    There is actually a way to explain what she could have seen in the situation... It's not what I think had happened but let's say as an umpire you don't think that you should fault Anders for invading the court. Than his racket movement was very restricted and he berely touched the shuttle when it was just passing the net before hitting the floor. You can see Chou's racket continue moving forward while Anders's trying to counter his kill. I would think if Chou would have been just a little closer and Anders a little back there would be a room to agree to the call...

    I do not say that it what happened, but this is the only explanation for what she could have seen. These sutuations are extremely complicated and It is not always fair to blame the umpire.
     
  5. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,154
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Anyone who plays badminton at a moderate level would know that from where Chou was standing, there was no way he could've even touched the net. It was a plain brain fart.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
     
    LenaicM likes this.
  6. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    294
    Location:
    Norway
    She didn't fault him for touching the net, the fault was for obstruction.
     
  7. phihag

    phihag Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2014
    Messages:
    998
    Likes Received:
    701
    Location:
    Germany
    I already wrote a bit about this situation in the tournament thread.

    In short, the most likeliest explanation to me seems that the umpire confused the players. Because Antonsen, when he went over the net, did certainly obstruct Chou Tien Chien – although a fault per §13.4.2, i.e. racket-over-the-net, would be my first choice.

    No, not really. The umpire mis-perceived the situation. It's not like she did not know the definition of obstruction.

    Since January 2019, ITTO §7.8 requires the service judge to assist in this situation and even walk over to the umpire. But that is assuming the service judge saw precisely what happened. The action was at the other side of the court, closer to the umpire, and having one eye to the left and another to the right of the net pole, it's not always easy to see what is happening.

    Let me take this question a little bit generally and propose learning opportunities for all involved:

    For BWF: Mainly consider video challenges. Restrict limits on service judges' head movement (I've never understood those) and propagate the service judge's role as an assistant to the umpire.

    For umpires: First of all, look to your service judge and encourage them to speak up if you missed something. In general, bear in mind §6.7 ITTO (but calling a fault is totally correct in this specific situation). If there is a fault, if you can, try to remember the situation, i.e. who did what. Practice vocabulary inside out so that the correct announcement comes naturally. Aim to be relaxed and get good sleep so that you are your best.

    For service judges: If you have the time, talk before the match to the umpire and make clear you're a team. Maybe work out signals to discretely show how you interpreted the situation. Focus on the match even after the service. In a critical situation, make eye contact with the umpire and be ready to help.

    For players: Accept that sometimes, the umpire, service judge, or line judge can get it totally wrong. You can protest, but keep it within reason. Accept that if an umpire does not correct their decision quickly, the chances of getting it overturned after 20s of protest are nil. Then, take a couple of seconds to focus on your next rally. Remember your strategy. I would say that Chou Tien Chen did all of that reasonably well.
     
    Saru, visor, LenaicM and 1 other person like this.
  8. LenaicM

    LenaicM Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,173
    Likes Received:
    907
    Location:
    Europe
    Very good advice and example since CTC ended up losing that set where he got wrongly faulted but winning the match! Strong mental. Better get back in the rhythm of the match instead of losing all focus, it happens a lot in football when a player get a wrong referee call then throw away his/her performance for the rest of the match. Somehow this situation here that happened to CTC is a lesson for amateur players too as we are self judging line calls and such and we sometime get judged wrongly by the opponent. It can be frustrating but better moving on!
     
    phihag likes this.
  9. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    294
    Location:
    Norway
    I mostly agree with @phihag however service judge should only correct a simple mistake or something umpire has missed. No way for service judge to disagree with the decision of the umpire unless he was asked. Also, this situation was not as simple as we think and there are always possible different explanations that is easy to miss.

    I would argue that the best explanation is that she thought the obstruction was the forward movement of Chou's racket while Anders attempted to counter-kill it... Again, I don't agree with it but this shows how difficult it is to see all the possible things that happen during such a fast exchange...
     
    #9 stradrider, Jul 27, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2019
  10. psyclops

    psyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    ger
    I propose phihag to replace all those currently working at bwf, not only is he umpire, he knows hawkeye, budgets, umpire training, and all other things badminton.
     
    visor and stradrider like this.
  11. psyclops

    psyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    ger
    Here is another situation where a fault was called at net. Why? What is the information that is lacking to make correct decision?
    http://bit.ly/2MnfkGP

     
    visor likes this.
  12. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    294
    Location:
    Norway
    It's very easy to be a "perfect judge" while sitting in front of the tv and watching the replays. When it happens in front of you and very fast it may totally look like the net was touched by the racket... If you watch again carefully you will see how the net has bulged on the other side at the moment the racket has passed it fooling into thinking that it was the racket and not the shuttle. It's an unfortunate mistake very hard to avoid...
     
    phihag likes this.
  13. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,154
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    That was a tough decision against NO just when she needed to gain a few points to reach a decider. Again when in doubt, the fault should never be called... unless clearly without a doubt. I'd really hate to see these egregious faults called in a year's time at the OG... and so would the world too.

    Sure, some would say umpires are just human too... but we hold them to a high standard to make the right and just decision. When such injustice occurs at such a critical moment in the game that seems to affect the outcome, it just leaves a nasty taste in our collective mouths.

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
     
    stradrider and phihag like this.
  14. stradrider

    stradrider Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2011
    Messages:
    635
    Likes Received:
    294
    Location:
    Norway
    I totally agree and wish there were perfect decisions all the time. It is for sure possible, but from my own experience I know that I shouldn't judge other people because no one knows, if he is in the same situation, is he going to do better or worse... And no mater how hard we try anyone will make a mistake at some point... I am grateful when I am spared but at the same time I have done my share and know how hard it is to avoid it... I wish people were more patient with others, no one is perfect...
     
    #14 stradrider, Jul 28, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2019
    phihag likes this.
  15. LenaicM

    LenaicM Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,173
    Likes Received:
    907
    Location:
    Europe
    And I agree with you too! (And @visor ) it was almost impossible for the umpire to give the right call here as when viewed live, it does look like NO touches the net.

    Yet during those latest tournaments we saw a fair share of umpiring mistakes. I personally believe these are mistakes that were not always easy to avoid except the CTC vs AA mistake in final of the Indonesia super 1000 which was just completely inexplicable. Umpires have the right to make mistakes. However now we acknowledged mistakes happens, I think it's time to find a solution, and stop throwing rocks at the umpires, surely a solution is possible. Again we discussed that in the Indonesia open tournament thread but the BWF has to resolve that matter. Putting an apprentice judge behind a screen that could be called by the umpire when in doubt is one of those. I'm sure the BWF has the resources to solve that matter.
     
  16. psyclops

    psyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    ger
    How to be decisive is what officials' and executives' success is based on. Effective decision-making is a method, a process, where potential hiccoughs and bumps can be identified, prior to navigating the perilous path. The main goal is to be right in making a call.

    There are other things to consider. Are we afraid of making the correct decision because we are striving for perfection? Nothing is perfect in our world. Striving for excellence, however is entirely another thing.

    Officials in sports are probably the ones only who are expected to start out perfect and improve from there. The idea of looking at video clips and having a discussion, is precisely to improve. Only when a problem is identified, can there be a solution. There may be improper mechanics, inadquate experience, insufficient training, or a blink of the eye (pardon the pun).

    It is true, things are easy, much easier, from the comforts of one's living room, watching and replaying clips, and in slo-mo. Without going into automated line-calling and other nonsense, here is my take.

    Net control is one of the most exciting tactic, and net play is one of the most entertaining display of skills. Players practice this for hours and hours. As officials, it behooves that they do something similar. As far as I understand, there is no vision or neuroscientist, or even a sports psychologist helping badminton officials become excellent. Nor video training, unless one watches the compilations (and comments) online.


    Keeping focus is important, being ready for play.

    Making a incorrect split second decision, is not what officials have in mind, and many who are in Zen-mode, will not dwell on it either. The fact remains, the decision was incorrect, so what now. Why it happened?

    Unlike the line judge decisions, the umpire's 'timing' judgement will not be subject to reversal. Call fault immediately, make corrections immediately are general instructions to be followed.

    Most net plays will have the shuttle played closer to the net, esp at elite levels. The defending shots will either be a straight up lift or a desperate hairpin. Many will touch the net at the tape/cord. There will also be a bow wave from the racquet head, and also from the player when rushing toward net.

    These are anticipated events. The focus is on the hot-spot area, where the shuttle, or net will be hit, and most likely space for the follow through. The service judge is also seeing the same situation and will have the same, or additional, information that the umpire can use to confirm.

    Facts:
    The shuttle dropped almost vertically from about a foot over the net.
    There are three materials to observe - the net, the shuttle, the racquet head.
    One is stationary, the other two move, one slower than the other.​

    Shuttle, after the hit, has the highest velocity over its trajectory.
    The racquet head generates a bow wave, which is another likely cause of net movement in the netted area.
    The tape will move when hit strongly by shuttle, with a consequent shuttle flight-path modification.​

    I leave it to you, BCers, to find if any of this is useful information to make a split-second decision.

    With better mechanics and more experience, better decisions will be made, and they will be correct. I am going to wear some asbestos briefs now.
     
    visor and LenaicM like this.
  17. whatsthecallUmp

    whatsthecallUmp Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2018
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    suisse
    Sometime ago, you were not so keen in changing the service judge's role. Good to find that you recognise a change is needed.


    BWF does not need to restrict limits on service judge's rubber-necking. There is enough evidence in literature that a steady head is necessary to gather proper vision-data. Recall the cheetah going for the kill - the whole organism is moving at more than 60 clicks, however, the head is steady and focussed on the prey, which is also moving.

    For umpires, and service judges, this is the drop zone, or the hot-spot - where the action is likely to happen. Following the shuttle in the air above the the umpire's head does not serve any purpose. And the service judge is best suited to see the fist shown by player at one end, or the advert board kicked when the umpire is focussed on putting out fires in the other end.
     
    #17 whatsthecallUmp, Jul 28, 2019
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2019
    visor likes this.
  18. whatsthecallUmp

    whatsthecallUmp Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2018
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    suisse
    There is no such thing as a simple mistake. Or even a small or big mistake.

    The officiating holy grail is to get the call correct. The call must have basis in law. A match is protestable when decision is made based on incorrect application of law, (ie) a technical violation. That this has never happened in badminton is commendable.

    To revisit the situation posted in this thread, lets consider, just for discussion sake, the service judge did get up and/or go to the umpire chair immediately the point was awarded to the red player. No one, absolutely no one would have had any problems with this. The timing of service judge assistance is critical. Once the umpire has started explanations, that ship is bound for the rocks, leading to team failure. There is also loss of credibility and trust. For everyone knows, an umpire is only as good as the last correct call. Players and coaches also know that one wrong call does not nullify a lifetime of correct calls, but they will remember you for that. As an official, it is traumatic agony. No official goes to any game to make incorrect calls or take bad decisions. Here's what one baseball umpire, Jim Joyce, had to say after a 'perfect game' for a player was no more - https://es.pn/2ylCZ21 and http://bit.ly/2ypTie9.

    Current guidelines, instructions and interpretations, says nothing about intervention, only assistance and teamwork.

    You may be right in that it is not as simple as we think. However, to make decisions in the spur of the moment, is an unenviable task that is given to the umpire.

    If I was the umpire and I dug a hole or wrecked the ship, I will apologise to the player and to the service judge (in that order) after gathering my thoughts. To the player for taking an incorrect decision, and to the service judge for failing as a team. This is a matter of pride to me. That I will never officiate badminton at this level is moot.
     
    visor likes this.
  19. psyclops

    psyclops Regular Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2017
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    27
    Location:
    ger
    Alrighty, boys and girls, men and women, ladies and gentlemen. Before you all claim this is a pandemic. Another fault called at a net play. Review for yourself - http://bit.ly/2SMroCQ



    If this happens to umpires who have hundreds of matches under their belt, what chance is for those who do not have experience?

    Lets see if BCers can offer some actionable solutions.
     
  20. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,154
    Likes Received:
    1,760
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Lol... seems like the umpires are aiming to make one erroneous call per match...

    Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
     

Share This Page