Ok, I really don't think there's any confusion to what everyone's saying. I'll lay it out. The rule: §13.3.1 It shall be a fault, if in play, the shuttle lands outside the boundaries of the court (i.e. not on or within the boundary lines); The issue: what does "landing outside" mean for a shuttle? Assumption: cork is the point of reference (this probably isn't an assumption it might be in another section of the rules, but we all know that the feathers are not considered) Why the debate: in different sports (especially ball sports), there are different considerations to what "in" and "out" means (i.e. volleyball, football, tennis etc.) Let me preface this by saying that due to the lack of clarity in the rule, I used hawkeye to try to infer more details than what the rule states. By no means do I think that hawkeye is infallible (or even if the animation is right, because as philag pointed out, it's just pretty pictures). To me, the main issue comes from the definition of "contact". From a theoretical point of view, a circle touching a line, or a sphere touching a surface, and hence in contact with the surface, only occurs at one, infinitesimally small point that has zero area. In practise, nothing is perfect, and especially when it comes to ball sports, the ball is in contact with a surface for a longer period because it compresses. When a ball compresses, more of its surface area comes into contact with the surface. From this perspective, contact of the ball with respect to the surface depends on however much it compresses. Larger compression = more contact. It usually never exceeds the full diameter of the ball. There is a second caveat to "contact" from the above, and that is when the ball is travelling at a high horizontal velocity. When this occurs, as the ball is compressing and decompressing, it is still travelling at the same horizontal velocity (minus some friction), and hence the contact area is not only expanded by the compression of the ball but also elongated due to the horizontal "skid" that occurs before the ball bounces up again. This is why in tennis, a fast shot results in an oval shape on hawkeye (again, I know this isn't perfect, but we can all understand from this logic). So what about badminton? I haven't seen a proper study on the elasticity of a shuttlecock cork, but considering that the cork is not filled with air, and that a full natural cork is made of wood, then it should be expected that the elasticity of the cork is less than an air-filled ball. This means that compression of the cork should be less than in other ball sports and hence, a smaller contact area should result. The issue with badminton is further complicated by having mats that are also softer than other solid surfaces (such as wood), but for the sake of comparison, let's assume that we can ignore any surface related effects. Now to the debate. If only the first contact is considered, as some have suggested here, then irrespective of the type of shot, the contact is a tiny dot. Why? Because, first contact is simply when the shuttle first touches the ground, and therefore all compression and/or skidding along the surface is irrelevant because it's a subsequent action of the shuttle against the ground. On the other hand, if the full contact (as in, the full duration of contact) of the cork against the ground is considered, then compression and skid both matter, which means the type of shot will also matter. A smash will cause more compression and skid vs a net roll where the shuttle drops straight down from net height with no added velocity. Hence, the area of contact will be enlarged due to compression and stretched/elongated due to skid. This is how it works in tennis and volleyball and it's what I also personally believe how it's working in badminton right now. Why did I reference hawkeye when it's not infallible, and the animations are just pretty pictures? Mainly because a small dot is a huge difference to any shaded area ever shown from hawkeye. Take my example from earlier, that shuttle was called in, and if people say that it's only the first contact that matters and the animation is wrong, then there are two possibilities. 1. The shaded area is completely misleading. 2. In the actual hawkeye that they saw, the shuttle was in fact a dot on the line (say, a coordinate point that was on the line), but instead they decided to make it a circle with a tiny edge touching the line. I find both of these possibilities very far fetched and I doubt that if any of these were true, the system could still possibly be used on an international level when so much is at stake. In fact, now that I think about it, the aerodynamics and material properties of the ball are part of the sport, and therefore it doesn't make sense to suggest that contact means the first contact and nothing else. One cannot possibly suggest that in a practical environment, a rule would only refer to a theoretical situation. For the OP's case, the shuttle could be in or out. If the shuttle lands softly with no compression, it's out. If the shuttle was slammed so hard into the ground such that the cork compressed so much to the point where the full diameter touches the surface, then it's in.
But seriously, at our social play levels, if it looks borderline in or out, we just call a let and replay the point. Unless you're playing against a cheater of course, then just don't play so close to the lines.
Well, it's not a theoretical situation that the first contact occurs in a very small area, it's just a fact that nobody argued about. To me, it doesn't make sense to assume that more than the first point of contact is considered, but not take the entirety of the shuttle including the feathers. That is certainly not started in the rules. As soon as the shuttle hits the ground, the play is over. This means to me, that any compression and especially any skitting doesn't matter, because the play was over before that. My problem is the word "lands". This is what causes the confusion, because it compares a shuttle with an aircraft (or something else flying in a controlled, an active way, while the shuttle has no active movement). When would you say a flight has landed? You say, it's at the end of the first contact with the ground of only the back tires including all compression and skidding, even if it's competently airborne again afterwards. That doesn't make sense to me, because it's not stated in the rules. Could you please explain where you read that? I know the picture of the aircraft is not great, but it illustrated the problem I see in the rules. And again: Does somebody think that the size of the court should change due to the choice of the last shot of the rally?
So I got an answer. I just got an email from a gentleman who works for Badminton World Federation, and he said it is definitely based on physical touch, not overlap... so in my photos in the earlier post, the bird is OUT! This kinda makes it easy to determine from a nearby ON court position (easier perhaps than for a line judge), because if you are on the court and near the shuttlecock you can see if there is any "daylight" between the white line and the white cork. If so, it is out. If not, it is in.
Guys this topic is WAY too serious! Stop making jokes and smilies. Go out and find this daylight between shuttle and line!
I thought that issue was solved a long time ago and the question was wether it's the first point (very small area) of contact or the full (much larger) area of contact including compression... Maybe I misunderstood the discussion.
I think because of of Hawkeye technology the assumption that touch means physical touching has been blurred and that overlapping and covering part of the line has come to also mean touching as in two lines on a piece of paper that cross each other they touch even though one theoretically could be 10 miles behind the other. Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
there was an epic thread on this from probably 10 yrs ago. can't seem to find it anymore. anyone has the link?
How did it become epic? Just curious. For us amateurs it shouldn't be, there r always cheaters out there.
At around 28:20, there were at least 2 different calls from 2 line judges. One was In, the other was out. The one who called out shouted, so I guess the official call was based on that. But what about the line judge other who gestured IN? What's the ruling for 2 different calls and seemingly without umpire intervention?
There are 2 lines judges back there. One to check whether the shuttle is long, and the other one is to check whether the shuttle is wide. So if one of the judge says it is out (either long or wide) then it is an OUT. If both judges say in (not long and not wide) then it's IN.
Sorry but I don't quite get your explanation. And I know what those judges' role are. On what basis would the OUT call be overruling the IN call? Somehow from what you said my understanding was that OUT calls are more correct? I mean, assuming the umpire didn't see it. What if the judge who made the OUT call made a mistake?
You are assuming that line judges decide whether the shuttle was in or out. That is not the case. Line judges only decide whether the shuttle was in or out regarding their line. Or, to quote the BWF Line judges manual: The Line Judge's manual also provides an example (with a pixelated graphic, so I redrew it): Area 1: A calls In, B calls Out, Final Decision Out Area 2: A calls In, B calls In, Final Decision In Area 3: A calls Out, B calls Out, Final Decision Out Area 4: A calls Out, B calls In, Final Decision Out
pay a little bit more attention to the videos there are always 2 line judges sitting around EACH corner: 1 that you can see easily sitting at the back of the court and 1 sitting at the side
