是 让
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。
是 让
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。
中风
如果存在干扰,球会直接击中非前锋的前墙,则判前锋击球。
是 让
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowed
中风
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.
是 让
球在到达前墙之前首先击中非击球员,然后击中侧墙,允许让球
是 让
挥杆时与对手的轻微接触影响了击球,而对手正竭力避免让球的干扰。安全让球的后续动作,球很高,当蓝衣球员击球时,对手已经安全了。
中风
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
是 让
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。
没有实际接触,前锋因害怕击中对手而没有挥拍。对手竭力躲避干扰,而前锋本可以做出很好的回击,因此允许让球。
蓝衣球员准备挥杆时遇到了粉衣球员的干扰,后者正在恢复到中心位置。从干扰处到球所在位置有很远的距离,蓝方球员本可以做出很好的回击,因此让球是正确的决定。
对方球员竭尽全力避开干扰,前锋本可以做出很好的回击,允许让球。穿粉色球衣的球员通过与臀部的接触遇到了足够的干扰,本可以做出很好的回击。是的,让球是正确的决定。
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。
挥杆时与对手的轻微接触影响了挥杆,而对手正竭力避免让杆的干扰。
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.This is a let for safety but the player in black could have hit the ball at a professional level. In the amateur game, this is more likely to be a stroke.
虽然有干扰,但这并不妨碍前锋看清球,也不妨碍前锋回球,这只是最小的干扰,因此可以判无让球。
有干扰,但前锋不可能很好地回传,不允许让球
既没有干扰,也没有合理的伤害恐惧,不允许让球。
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。
黑衣球员射门得手。
从正面图可以看出,前锋走错了方向,而且一直没有纠正自己的平衡,以至于无法改变方向并拿到球。这种情况完全是前锋造成的。不让球是正确的决定。
如果存在干扰,球会直接击中非前锋的前墙,则判前锋击球。
前锋无法挥杆,因为后续击球会击中非前锋。
如果存在干扰,球会直接击中非前锋的前墙,则判前锋击球。
穿白/黑衣的球员想上前击球,但由于对手迟迟不移动,越过了她的路径和位置,因此无法在她希望击球的位置上击球。
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.Although there was space for the player in grey to hit the ball onto the front wall, the follow through would have hit the player in blue if the ball was hit.
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,而击球手本可以很好地回击,但对手没有尽力避开干扰,由于击球手没有机会回击,因此判击球手击球。
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。
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.
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。
有干扰,但前锋不可能很好地回传,不允许让球
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 grey hits a good shot. The player in blue’s racket preparation and line to the ball is more towards the opponent than a genuine effort to play the shot. “No Let, I need you to go to the ball and not the opponent” is the correct decision and explanation.
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。
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
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。
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。
挥杆因与对手接触而受阻,判前锋击球。蓝衣球员想击球,但当他要打球时,灰衣球员向球做了一个动作,造成了足够的干扰,因此判给击球员一杆。如果穿灰色衣服的球员保持住位置,就会被判让球。
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。
The swing was affected by slight contact with the opponent who was making every effort to avoid the interference a let is allowed
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。
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 referee had to judge how far the ball came off the back wall, could the striker in peach hit the ball straight or cross court and had the opponent stayed far enough to one side. In this situation there is enough doubt and a risk of safety. Yes Let is the correct decision
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。
虽然存在干扰,但击球员为了赢得一杆而夸张挥杆,允许让球。蓝衣球员的肩膀以夸张的方式转动,表示在寻找对手。球远离蓝衣球员的准备区。
There was neither interference nor reasonable fear of injury, therefore a no let is allowed.The player in white has to run the diagonal length of the court. The player in burgundy plays a volley from a central position. There is distance between the players and the ball. There is also access to the ball. No Let is the correct decision.
挥杆受到与对手轻微接触的影响,而对手正在尽力避免干扰,允许让球。对手挡住了球,但球正在远离双方球员。有足够的干扰,可以判罚让球。
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 player in yellows shot lands short which makes this a let. Even with the ball missing the target, there is a case to ask the player in black to show more willing to go and play the ball.
如果存在干扰,球会直接击中非前锋的前墙,则判前锋击球。
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。
白衣球员击出一记发球,球击中边墙后向球场中央飞去。黑衣球员正准备反手击球,不得不换到正手侧才能击球。球飞离黑衣球员,而黑衣球员不在击球位置上。
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.
当时存在干扰,前锋本可以很好地回传。对手正在尽力解围,让球是允许的。当前锋可以击球时,就有了比赛空间。对手保持位置,不挡道。前锋的挥拍不足以阻止挥拍。让球是正确的决定。
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。
The player in black hits a kill that pops out from the side wall and comes back towards the service box. There is no access for the player in yellow. 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 to the striker is the correct decision.
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。
穿黑/白色球衣的球员需要走到对手身后,因为球很深,线路也在那里。前锋本来可以直接拿到球,但他选择了间接路径,然后以干扰为由要求让球,这是不允许的。
蓝衣球员打出一球,但她没有很好地解围,粉衣球员本来可以很好地回击,但也稍微向对手移动了一下。因此,让球是正确的决定。
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.
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。
前锋本可直接触球,但却选择了间接触球。来球的前锋最初的移动距离球场太远,从而造成了干扰。不允许进球是正确的判罚。
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。
这属于 8.9.3 的情况,即没有实际接触,前锋因害怕击中对手而暂停挥杆,则适用 8.6 的规定。黄衣队员保持了一段时间,当黑衣队员阻止挥杆时,前锋已经对能打哪一球产生了怀疑。因此,挥杆受到了对手的影响,而对手正竭尽全力避免干扰,因此允许让球。
虽然有干扰,但黑衣棋手不可能很好地回击,不允许让球。
接收最新消息

订阅我们的时事通讯

获取新文章通知