Unfortunately, many umpires did not apply the rule as it was intended. Although as you say the rule was very clear, however, it was not applied as intended by a majority of umpires. Therefore, the rule degenerated into hiding the ball with the free arm and with the server's stomach in some instances. A solution, which was adopted at the AGM this year, is to force the server to remove the free arm from the area between his body and the receiver. This is very simple and ensures visibility to the receiver and easier judgement by the umpire. We no longer refer to any pyramid or imaginary space. This was the documentation from last year which was necessary to help umpires and players in the interpretation of the rule. It is now much simpler, and as long as the player removes his non-playing arm as soon as he has projected the ball vertically upwards, then the service should be legal. Of course forehand services are permitted and very possible. Do not forget that the player can rotate the trunk and is not static with his body. The top players, and even the young players I have seen do not have any problem with this. As a matter of fact that was the case last year in the beginning of the season., until the players discovered that they could tuck the free arm into their bodies, or that they could remove the free arm at the last possible moment. The new rule prevents these two instances.
I will forward your e-mail to the Chairman of the Umpires Committee who will be issuing an explanatory note to all umpires. In the meantime, please do not read in the rule what does not exist. It is very simple. The player must clear the free arm from the area between his body and the receiver. Use logic, exercise judgement, ensure that the ball is visible to the receiver and all will be well.
Adham Sharara
Dear Mr. Sharara
I have recently visited the ITTF website to study the revised service law having heard the revised wording differs from that agreed at the ITTF meeting. I studied the PPP but could not make any sense of it and so had a look at the interpretation and implementation and find that this again makes reference to an imaginary pyramid when there is no reference to this in the wording of the service law. The revised wording of the service law appears ambiguous and differs from that agreed by the meeting in that it implies the arm being removed from sight and not just dropped to the side. This would appear to rule out forehand serves from the side of the body but the law makes no reference to where the ball should be when it is projected except to say it should be clearly visible to the receiver. The PPP appears to
imply that the ball must be in front of the body but the presentation is so vague that this is difficult to determine. What is needed is a presentation showing clearly the service action and stating just as clearly where in the imaginary pyramid the ball should be. If it must be in front of the body then this should be clearly stated and must also be just as clearly stated in the wording of the service law. Players do not know of and are not interested in an interpretation as everyone will have their own interpretation and who is to say which is the correct interpretation.
It appears to me that the ITTF have once again shot themselves in the foot by moving the goalposts and made complicated that which should be uncomplicated. It will again be anything but easy to apply and will create more problems than it solves. Will IU's and National Associations receive the promised information pack, if last time is anything to go by the answer must be an emphatic NO.
Ken Armson, MBE
IU & ETTA National Referee
|
