The shuttle is the white thing on the image. This image is from a video taken from the opposite side of the court (the distance explains why the quality is so low). The image is from the very moment the shuttle first touches the ground. The shuttle subsequently bounced outwards to land in between the singles and doubles lateral lines (about 30% of the distance between them). EDIT: I realise I was on the court so my brain makes a lot of assumption about where the lines go on that image. In addition to the original image (zoomed, colors), I added an image on which I increased the contrast, suppressed the colors and drew the lines in green above and centered on the lines on the picture. I hope this may bring some additional clarity to those who can see whether the shuttle is in or out.
Neither. I have trouble recognizing the lines in this picture, let alone the precise position of the shuttle. If this captured what I'd see from the umpire's chair, I would 1. make a mental note to get new glasses 2. call a let, as that's way too unclear to decide.
it is impossible to tell if it is out of the sideline, even if it is a perfectly clear 4k recording. the angle of the viewer is not anywhere close to be able to make a fair judgement. it need to be taken from staring down the line like where a linejudge would position themselves. and with such a poor resolution video capture, it would be impossible and unfair for anyone to make any judgement. I cannot even tell where the line is!
And...if your initial response is what the heck!? Call a let. (I know doesn't rhyme nicely but close enough... ) Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
Ok. I realise I was on the court so my brain makes a lot of assumption about where the lines go on that image. In addition to the original image (zoomed, colors), I added an image on which I increased the contrast, suppressed the colors and drew the lines in green above and centred on the lines on the picture. I hope this may bring some additional clarity to those who can see whether the shuttle is in or out.
1. too close and too far ( ) to call. 2. since it is on his side, it is your opponent's call. (at least that's the general rule around here)
I am the guy on the other side of the net (closest to the shuttle) and I said I thought it was out. Up to four people are looking at the shuttle in that every instant: One didn't say anything, my opponent said it was in, I said I thought it was out and one (supporting/coaching my opponent) said it should be replayed.
I agreed to replay but it frustrates me to do so when way too often I clearly see the shuttle land outside the line right under my eyes, and when this footage, according to me, confirms what I saw on this video-recorded occasion. I could post the video wherefrom the images were taken if it would help determine.
it depends on the customs and rules of where you play. if it were a tournament and I was in the position to make the call and I am confident that it was out, then I will be firm on the call. however, if it were just recreational play, i would give it to the opponent if it were close enough.
The problem is in a league game or recreational play you have no line judges and no umpire, so it's mostly your word against your opponent's. In this case you either argue about it to no end or trust the person closest to the shuttle to be honest with their judgement. If neither person can do that then replay the point. In my league games we play quite seriously, but also most of us know other and respect each other's honesty calling shuttles, so usually we don't replay unless it's just too hard to call. You also have to remember that at the end of the day it's not a career and money isn't at stake. If your opponent insists on a replay then just think of it as another rally to win against them. A few weeks ago I was playing singles in our league game and won the first set comfortably, and second set it was something like 17-18. I hit one just inside the line in the right deep corner and my opponent picked it up and was walking over to serve before he noticed I was calling it in. He gave me that point, but the very next rally I hit a plum on the line smash on the left side and again he picked up the shuttle, looked at me and was like "oh was that in as well?". I was gonna say "that was pretty obviously in as well" but then I thought, I didn't want him to feel like I was calling all the shots on his side where I'm further away, and he's obviously not wanting to be honest with the lines he sees or he's somehow not seeing them correctly, so I offered to replay the point even though I knew it was in. Ended up losing the replayed point and that set, then lost the match in three sets. As it was only the opening round of the new season and we had already lost overall, I decided there was no need to make such a big deal out of it. Sometimes you just have to decide if the occasion is really worth the hassle of arguing over a line call.
What you did is that you decided to accept playing against yourself when you KNOW your opponent was being dishonnest and that only for SOCIAL / EMOTIONAL reasons. You may fool yourself consciously buy what you are doing by doing that shapes your subconscious which in the future will play against yourself. I have decided to make badminton part of my routine, and as every part of my routine that is important to me I'd like to keep it emotionally clean and either clear such problems out by finding the best resolution to it (or, in the worst case, as you say, find a proper coping mechanism: such as telling myself these matches are not important to me). But keep in mind that the way you decide to go about any habit you have will affect your subconscious way of doing things in all areas of your life (carreer, family, friends, etc.) and I would not recommend rationalizing going with what you know is UNFAIR against yourself.
Neither am I saying it does, as your quote of me testifies I said "according to me". I provide the images for others to be able to base their own opinion. So don't quote me saying this proves nothing as if I said it did. Instead: Say that according to you, this proves nothing. You don't need to quote anyone or anything to state your interpretation, other than maybe the picture you are providing an interpretation for.
I don't understand this response at all. It doesn't seem to follow any logics. Unless I misunderstood (in which case I apologize) this is an emotional response with no purpose.
