中风
如果挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,则判击球方得一杆,即使对手已尽力避免干扰。
没有让
There was interference but the striker did not make every effort to get to and play the ball, no let is allowed.The player in pink was wrong footed and corrected, and then encountered the interference. There was space to get through to the ball and the striker really needed to show more urgency to go and play the ball.
没有让
这是一个很接近的判罚,因为穿桃色衣服的球员在边线上停留的时间比他应该停留的时间要长一些,但穿灰色衣服的球员并没有走向球。不让球是正确的决定。
是 让
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return; a let is the correct decision.Very close to a stroke though as there may have been a line behind. If a stroke is awarded here, does it encourage players to dive across even when they cannot volley?
没有让
既没有干扰,也没有合理的伤害恐惧,不允许让球。
是 让
穿灰色球衣的球员只是让出了足够的空间,让人有足够的理由怀疑横传是否会击中他,从而不适用规则 8.11.1。因此,为了安全起见,让球是正确的决定。
中风
前锋本可以打出漂亮的回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,因此判前锋击球。
中风
前锋本来可以打出很好的回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,则判前锋击球。
中风
红色球手快速横击,球飞向中路。黑色球手打出一记进攻性的发球,但球落在短线前方,你必须考虑击球点的位置。黑衣球员的基础很宽,没有让对手通过。击球是正确的决定,因为黑衣球员让对手很难通过。前锋本来可以打出很好的回球,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,因此判前锋击球。
白方棋手将球打到了后角,他可以做得更多,以更好地清理。黑方棋手可以做得更多,以向上移动并绕过对方,但他向白方棋手移动,并用手臂挡住了对方。
球是松散的,但球员和球之间也有空间。
对手正在竭力避免干扰,而前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。
挥杆受到与对手轻微接触的影响,而对手正竭尽全力避免干扰;允许让球。桃色球手不太确定对手的位置,在准备过程中轻微接触。在这种情况下,击球太容易了。
有干扰,而对手正在竭力回避,前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。是的,让球是正确的决定。
对手正在竭力避免干扰,而前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。
在这个级别的职业比赛中,球员需要完成击球。在初学者或俱乐部级别,你会希望他们停下来请求让球。
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, no let isallowed.The player in yellow was not ready to play the shot.
前锋本可直接出球,但却选择了间接出球,然后请求干扰让球,不允许让球。最初的一步很重要,白衣球员向对手迈出了第一步。没有让球是一个很好的强有力的决定,并给出了很好的解释。
既没有干扰,也没有受伤的合理担忧,就不允许让球。在俱乐部比赛中,根据水平不同,可能更多的是为了安全而让球。
黑衣球员射门得手。
前锋本可直接触球,但却选择了间接触球的路径,然后要求因干扰而让球,这是不允许的。
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply. So, the striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponent was not making every effort to avoid the interference, a stroke is awarded to the striker.
挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,即使对手竭力避免干扰,也应判击球方得一杆
如果存在干扰,球会直接击中非前锋的前墙,则判前锋击球。
如果挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,则判击球方得一杆,即使对手已尽力避免干扰。
前锋本来可以打出很好的回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,则判前锋击球。
9.9.3 如果沒有實際接觸,而前鋒因害怕打到對手而暫停揮杆,則適用8.6的 規定,前鋒本來可以打出很好的回球,但對手沒有盡一切努力避開干 擾,則判給前鋒擊球。.11.1有干擾,球會直接打到非前鋒的前牆,判給前鋒一桿,除非前鋒轉 向或在做進一步嘗試,在這種情況下允許讓球。重要的是要考虑到穿栗色球衣的球员已经准备好及时击球。
The first step of the player in blue was up the court and the drop went deeper which meant the player was out of position to get the shot. The striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball and then requested a let for interference, no let is allowed
前锋本来可以很好地回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,因此判给前锋一杆。白衣球员本可以打出漂亮的回球,但却没有机会。
黄衣球员打出了一记制胜球,尽管有一些干扰,但前锋不可能打出很好的回击;不让球是正确的决定。
前锋本来可以很好地回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,判前锋击球。
There was interference but the striker did not make every effort to get to and play the ball, no let is allowed.The was interference but the player in blue doesn’t move anywhere and there is distance to the shot. No let is the correct call.
从正面角度看,黑衣球员没有及时做好击球准备。
挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,即使对手竭力避免干扰,也应判击球方得一杆
挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,即使对手竭力避免干扰,也应判击球方得一杆
有干扰,但前锋不可能很好地回传,不允许让球
如果挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,则判击球方得一杆,即使对手已尽力避免干扰。
如果前锋因过度挥杆而造成干扰,则不允许让球。蓝衣前锋的挥拍动作夸张。观察肩膀以及肩膀如何转动是一个很好的线索。
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowedFeet of the striker trip on those of the non-striker.
There has been no actual contact and the swing has been held by the striker for fear of hitting the opponent, the provisions of 8.6 apply, and, the striker would have been able to make a good return but the opponentwas not able to avoid the interference, so a stroke is awarded to the striker.Even though every effort was being made by the player in yellow, there was no chance for the player in black to hit the ball.
挥杆时与对手的轻微接触影响了击球,而对手正竭尽全力避免让杆的干扰。
如果存在干扰,球会直接击中非前锋的前墙,则判前锋击球。
如果挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,则判击球方得一杆,即使对手已尽力避免干扰。
当时对手正在竭力躲避干扰,而前锋本可以很好地回防,让球是允许的。球员和球之间有相当大的空间,穿栗色球衣的球员也有空间去干扰后方拿球。
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker, even if the opponent was making every effort to avoid the interference.The player in pink hits a crosscourt lob that comes out towards the middle. The player in blue attempts to strike the ball but makes heavy contact with the opponent. Although the swing was not prevented, the trajectory and result of the shot was completely altered due to the contact of the swing. Therefore a stroke is the correct decision.
There was interference that the opponent was making every effort to avoid and the striker would have been able to make a good return, a let is allowed.The striker should be told to make more effort to go directly to the ball.
对手正在竭力避免干扰,而前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。
在没有实际接触的情况下,击球手因害怕击中对手而没有挥杆,但击球手本可以很好地回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,则判击球手击球。
有干扰,但前锋不可能很好地回传,不允许让球
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowed
The swing was prevented by contact with the opponent, a stroke is awarded to the striker
对手正在竭力避免干扰,而前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。
虽然我们不希望棋手跑到对手的背后,但在本例中,黑方棋手击出了落点,并站在了射门的正后方,这就意味着两边都无法进入。在这种情况下,黑衣球员的过失更大。黄衣球员推得很高,预料到了落点。前锋本来可以打出很好的回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,因此判前锋击球。
射门直奔死角,接触面积极小。球员需要去拿球。干扰是有的,但这并不妨碍前锋看到球,也不妨碍他回传,这是最小的干扰,不允许让球。
挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,一杆判给击球者只要足够的干扰阻止蓝衣球员击球,一杆就是正确的决定。
虽然有干扰,但这并不妨碍前锋看到球并接近球,从而做出一个好的回击,这是最小的干扰,因此允许不让球。穿粉色球衣的球员最初的移动是上场,然后向球移动,在那里她遇到了干扰。对球员的解释是,你必须打那个球。
对方球员竭力回避干扰,而前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。双方球员都略显拼抢,因此让球是一个公平的决定。
黑衣球员击出的落点接住了侧壁。灰衣球员向球移动,但她下一击的通道和位置受到了对手的阻挠。击球是正确的决定。前锋本可以打出一个很好的回球,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,因此判前锋击球。
蓝衣球员持球时间较长,球第二次反弹是在两名球员面前。为了击球,蓝衣球员需要向前迈出一步,这意味着干扰较少,因此可以做出让球的决定。
虽然有干扰,但前锋不可能做出很好的回传,因此不允许让球。在呼吁让球时,蓝衣球员距离球很远。
虽然有干扰,但黑衣棋手不可能很好地回击,不允许让球。
The player in yellow was off balance from the previous shot and went for the opponent more than going to play the ball.Because the striker had direct access but instead took an indirect path to the ball and then requested a let for interference, no let is allowed.
前锋本可直接触球,但却选择了间接触球,然后要求因干扰而让球;不让球是正确的判罚。
接收最新消息

订阅我们的时事通讯

获取新文章通知