The net is taller than 40cm. But Hawk-Eye should be able to judge of its a specific height. Maybe that's the reason.
I don't see how Hawk-Eye should be able to decide in real time if a serve was correct or not. And I'm not very keen on seeing additional service challenges.
It can decide in real time if it was a goal in soccer, so why should it not be capable of doing it? There's no need for an instant rendered simulation, only the decision is needed. I'm not keen on seeing more service fault challenges. I don't even think it would solve anything, because quite a few wrong service fault calls concern the racket (not) pointing in a downward direction. I'm just trying to understand why they want to take a slight advantage from taller people. It's not that badminton is a sport designed for tall people at all...
I think we shouldn't underestimate the power of money in soccer and that they have special stadiums just for it it or as main reason. How many TV courts do we have in badminton? If they can't film every court with 2-3 cameras, I think that a hawk eye system for all courts will be out of budget. IMO badminton should take itself more serious and should stop changing everything or making adjustments. And for my own games, I don't will have any hawkeye system or anything else. Changing the rule sounds not funny to me, even if I can serve higher.
I can see why they have considered changing this rule, to make it easier to enforce consistently and to limit the advantage taller players have but as some have pointed out I'm sure it will be a bit of a hot topic among the pros too. I personally don't think they necessarily need to change the rules to make it easier to enforce consistently. They could use technology to decide where the waist height is and provide say an augmented reality live video for the service judge to decide whether it was a fault. Or they could beam a laser line onto the players shirt as they serve for a more visual confirmation of the height? But I kind of agree that taller players do have a slight advantage in playing the low serve in that they are closer to the net and that the trajectory is flatter. When trying to serve tight to the tape, raising the contact point does help to some degree, particularly when you are trying to get the shuttle to dip as soon as it passes the net.
Clearly what we need, at club level, is nets with built-in laser projectors. Then you could see whether your opponent's serve was a fault. To make sure the lasers can be seen easily, however, we must return to the rule of all-white clothing.
Does anybody know if this is an exclusive BWF rule or a discussed standard rule for badminton at all? I think that an anatomy based rule is easier to discuss in low level badminton. I never meet somebody who wasn't open to play a let with the agreement to pay attention not to serve too high. Same for early starters. In a friendly and social manner you can be fair and also have fun without making a fight out of it. That a let is not a standard for international games is clear, but for my own games this worked always well, even in tournaments and league games. And as long as a slightly high serve didn't make me feel that my opponent disadvantage me to huge amount, I keep my mouth shut and don't care. I think that everybody has developed a feel of his own serve which is legal in low level and club play. As I heard that 1.15m could be the new border, I don't know at which height in relation to my body this is, who else? Since a child I know where my bottom rib is. It's just in my opinion the better reference. That tall player have some advantages is natural. I think nobody would ever think to give a tall player shorter rackets by a rule to even out their reach and angles. Also in soccer nobody would think about adjustable goals for soccer, because taller keepers has an advantage. IMO only rules which could be used easily make sense.
That's the big question. Either way, we have problems. If it's standard for everyone, then I can't imagine how you will judge this in club play. If it's exclusive to certain levels of BWF competition, then players who reach those levels will have a confusing transition to deal with. I feel it's important that everyone plays by the same rules (even though in practice, it works out differently when you have tournament officials). I don't like the idea of one service rule for general play, and a different rule for elite play.
I agree with you. Here in Germany the BL (1. Bundesliga and 2. Bundesliga, national players) play the new scoring system (5x11), below this level we play 3x21. So if a team goes up from RL (Regionalliga) to BL (Bundesliga) the players have also transitions to make by playing the new scoring system. To have an impression: at BL play atm players like Josche Zurwonne, the Magee's, Robert Blair and so on. On the tour they play 2x21 again. Wouldn't surprise me that they change something for an exclusive level.
Why not just.. paint a reference line on the net? (and additional reference ruler on the post) I mean... it would be low cost. Both of the players (or teams can see it).. Service judge can see it. But then again... Well.. it is true that.. the rules are annoyingly open end, in the sense that nobody really could controls the height of your service in the rule, in that unless you play naked, lowest rib is just... As for the number 1.15m.... hmm... I never really measure how high or low it is..
This puts tall guy at disadvatage, not to say its an advantage for short guys i think its just the same for 1.75m or below.
For the guys complaining about a disadvantage for taller players, I have no problem for allowing it to be 1.2m. Fair game now?
if everyone is at the same height, and we the racket pointing down rule is still in effect, I don't see it as much of a benefit to anyone. in fact, try serving, with racket "point in downwards position" around the height of your chest, it is not that easy!
As you can clearly see here, Axelsen's lowest rib is nowhere near the top of the net, even with Lee Chong Wei pushing down slightly on the tape. The same would be true of Kolding and Ivanov. Maybe someone over 7' tall would have a rib cage entirely above the net but that is a moot point for international badminton and everyone we've ever seen play the game has a serve that must travel upwards, past and future, with or without the 1.15m rule. Wow. Until you mentioned it, I hadn't even noticed that Rule 9.1.9 does actually require the upward trajectory. Since I've never seen a player with such an elevated rib cage, the upward trajectory has just been a necessity based on simple geometry and therefore needs no enforcement. I think the judgment difficulty would be a bridge that service judges would resign themselves to crossing only when they come to it. In other words, the day you have Yao Ming on court, you will know you have to start thinking about rule 9.1.9. You can see here that the net height 1.52m is almost exactly at the 5' mark on the ruler and that is only slightly below Yao's lowest rib, i.e. above the lowest rib of almost everyone else on the planet.
Did anyone else notice that in the video, at no point do either of the players measure 1.15m and find out where it really is relative to their ribcages? A rough estimate using a photo editor suggests that Axelsen is looking at a serving limit lower than his elbow but higher than his navel. That's higher than we were allowed in the 80s. Maybe Kolding and Ivanov would have a laser shooting them at their waistband but nothing like the nonsense in the video.
Rule changes can only be decided at the Annual General Meeting. The next AGM will be on May 19th, 2018. Major changes of the law (scoring systems, but this change may qualify as well) are typically tested for a season in youth and lower-level tournaments before they actually apply at all BWF tournaments. If the feedback for this fixed height experiment version 2 (we had another one before) is positive, it could be introduced in late 2019.
I agree fully with this rule. Set a standard of how high you can serve from. It's equal for everybody so there's really no advantage for anyone on service, like it should be.
