View Full Version : The Difference Between Indonesian Players and Chinese Players
Pebulutangkis
10-31-2003, 02:49 AM
Compared to Chinese players, Indonesians tend to last longer on the world scene. For example, Taufik Hidayat had been on the scene during the era of sun jun & peter gade's dominance, and is still on the scene during chen hong's era. ricky/rexy was there in the cheah soon kit era, and was also there in the ha/kim era. Sun Jun, Gong Zhichao, Dai Yun, Ji Xinpeng had very short careers at the highest level. Chinese tend to have around 2-3 years at the top, while Indonesians have maybe more than 5 years.
I believe is mostly due to the training system. The Chinese system is very tough, so players will get tired and/or injured, and retire from the game. The Indonesian system lets the players grow naturally, so they will not be worn out quickly.
even longer are the Danes.
Rikke Olsen has been around before 1996. Michael Soggard also, he just retired not too long ago. there is also Peter Rasmussen, Gade has been around longer than Taufik i think.
but true, Chinese tend to fade pretty quickly. not too much because of the hard training, but also because there are too many youngsters are there to fill up the gap. it is hard to keep up with the younger and fresher players.
But on the other hand China have successfully replaced world stars in most events every couple of years. Indonesia have not replaced their stars and have seen them keep playing into decline until retirement, thus indonesia is very weak compared with ten years ago.
swijaya0101
10-31-2003, 03:32 AM
dlp,
it's because most of indonesian youngsters are taken out by other countries.
for example: singapore alone has taken around 8-12 players for their national squads ...
PBSI has mentioned that within 3-5 years Indonesia wont be able to challange China + South Korea ... because lack of re-generation.
there are too many youngsters are there to fill up the gap
absolutely true ... i also believe that chinese youngsters are more dicipline than indonesian youngsters.
Swijaya,
Thanks for that info, why are are all the youngsters going? Money? Politics? Coaching?
swijaya0101
10-31-2003, 03:39 AM
money ...
with the corrupt officials running the PBSI ... i guess more and more players are not happy with the situation.
take an example ... sometimes in 1996-1997 ... susi susanti lodge a complaint, because money from her contract with yonex were not yet released.
LazyBuddy
10-31-2003, 07:12 AM
Originally posted by kwun
but true, Chinese tend to fade pretty quickly. not too much because of the hard training, but also because there are too many youngsters are there to fill up the gap. it is hard to keep up with the younger and fresher players.
Exactly. I believe this is the main reason over "health" concern.
I am pretty sure pros from other nations facing serious injuries at times as well. However, those nations will face a tough tough time when their top gun has to be put away. For example, if Carmilla or Mia could not attend an event, the WS quarter final or above will be Asian (most likely CHN) warfare. When KOR top 2 MD suffering injury, none of their youngster could even pass 2nd round. When WCH got problem, MAS MS have a tough time to hold spot in 3rd round or later. However, CHN seldom face such issues, especially in MS, WS and WD. They usually have tons of talent could go deeper, if 1 or 2 are down, the rest still could raise the champ trophy, never have to metion once a while, a young "black horse" can beat up the older brothers and shock the world.
It might be a sad thing for fans who like particular CHN player, and only able to see him/her around for 3 yrs. However, being able to frequent "update" the team, while staying on top at all time, it's a proof for how successful such program is.
TRFred
11-03-2003, 06:07 PM
I think it is based on the population, Indonesia compared to China has less so the great players are less or irreplaceable, while China, the most populated, so many badminton players, therefore competition is very stiff in the try-outs, i think government(Communist) control on who is to play outside China, makes way for more try-outs for old and new players. Thats why China superstars stardom dont last long.
jamesd20
11-03-2003, 06:18 PM
I also think the reason why chinese are more disciplined is that due to a large number f players (larger pool, the chinese can afford to forget about the players with flambuouyance and "personality" such as taufik, but if indonesia dont have taufik then who do they have?
-sony, who is good but a little young, and needs to learn more dimension to his game rather than pace, and the new simon santoso, whom I have only heard about on this site.
I believe there is a similar situation in england, the players get to the top, but then feel they have nothing to prove, and become less intrested in improving, but merely just being able to beat there domestic rivals.
frictionman
11-04-2003, 12:03 PM
Chinese players tend to retire early coz there are many new generation players to replace the older ones (OLDER ones not Old ones ok?)
Imagine with a population of 1.3 BILLION Chinese in CHINA ALONE they have the worlds biggest supply of human talents...
And yet conversely Denmark (population around 5 million) have as many world class men as anyone!
chub2003
11-04-2003, 10:27 PM
maybe the reason danes stay in longer than asians is the style of play? I notice the asian players tend to move very fast and jump all the time, which is very demanding of their body. Then, they must retire because of health issues, or just that their body cannot support the play anymore. Danes, however, are taller and more muscular, their style of play is not as intense and therefore less demanding on their body, because of their build they are able to get to shots easily, while asian players must compensate with speed.
dlp,
PBSI has mentioned that within 3-5 years Indonesia wont be able to challange China + South Korea ... because lack of re-generation.
absolutely true ... i also believe that chinese youngsters are more dicipline than indonesian youngsters.
WHEW! Seriously??? They said it OPENLY????
Man, that's sth! Okay I'm sad. Because I've been supporting INA since I was 12 (I'm 22 now) and the INA I remembered from the early to mid 90s had so many MS in the top 10, pretty much like China today.
It's weird to see how a country gradually fades out of a sport until you only kinda remember that they were once good at it.... sth like a tradition without any real substance.
When I was in Korea, this Korean girl and I were talking abt badminton (actually I got started by asking if she knew Lee Dong Soo and she said, "Yeah, the cute one?") and she mentioned that Indonesia and Malaysia were really really good. And I was like "Yeah" (stopped myself fr saying "that was in the past" coz of Southeast Asian pride... ha) but somehow I couldn't help but feel a bit sorry for the state of things now.
Oh well, tt's beyond my control really....
viver
04-06-2004, 01:51 AM
WHEW! Seriously??? They said it OPENLY????
Man, that's sth! Okay I'm sad. Because I've been supporting INA since I was 12 (I'm 22 now) and the INA I remembered from the early to mid 90s had so many MS in the top 10, pretty much like China today.
It's weird to see how a country gradually fades out of a sport until you only kinda remember that they were once good at it.... sth like a tradition without any real substance.
When I was in Korea, this Korean girl and I were talking abt badminton (actually I got started by asking if she knew Lee Dong Soo and she said, "Yeah, the cute one?") and she mentioned that Indonesia and Malaysia were really really good. And I was like "Yeah" (stopped myself fr saying "that was in the past" coz of Southeast Asian pride... ha) but somehow I couldn't help but feel a bit sorry for the state of things now.
Oh well, tt's beyond my control really....
I suspect Indonesia decline in badminton is related more to politics, organizational issues rather than talent shortage. :rolleyes:
Oh, of course! Which is why I said I couldn't do anything abt it! ;)
QUOTE=viver]I suspect Indonesia decline in badminton is related more to politics, organizational issues rather than talent shortage. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]
Pecheur
04-06-2004, 08:45 PM
When I was in Korea, this Korean girl and I were talking abt badminton (actually I got started by asking if she knew Lee Dong Soo and she said, "Yeah, the cute one?")
Why doesn't this surprise me? ;)
and she mentioned that Indonesia and Malaysia were really really good. And I was like "Yeah" (stopped myself fr saying "that was in the past" coz of Southeast Asian pride... ha) but somehow I couldn't help but feel a bit sorry for the state of things now.
Oh well, tt's beyond my control really....
Interestingly I think Malaysia could be on it's way back up again, Indo is definately going down with the lack of youngsters, however that's purely political, and they could reemerge from their lows in say 10 years maybe. Whilst it is sad when old powers go down, it's nice as new powers emerge, just how far will say Germany manage to go?
isn't ina more about lack of funds
and Germany too much money?
I dont know .
wilfredlgf
04-07-2004, 12:34 AM
How about the likes of Yang Yang and Zhao Jianhua who seem to last much longer than those of today? I think that will have to do with training styles instead then?
seven
04-07-2004, 01:59 AM
and Germany too much money?
what do you mean?????? :confused:
what do you mean?????? :confused:
Dont mean anything, everyone knows Germans are flush with money and incomes are very high.
They are the few people who can afford to invest in badminton knowing most of it will never come back.
Other people tend to watch the bottom line carefully ie. getting back money invested.
.
I think one area where 80s differ from now is proffesionalism.
80s probably have fewer tours, people choose tours.
Nowadays everyone earns money , plays for money and try to optimise earnings over many tours a year,so i think competition is very intense and difficult to stay long because of hard training and playing schedule.
Also could be because of rankings for Olympics.
seven
04-07-2004, 06:45 AM
I don't think German badminton has particularly more money than the other european countries...
and why "too much"???
Dont take my statements too seriously,
I heard from some Europeans that the German League offers the highest prizes.
And beside German workers I heard are World's highest paid.80US $ an hour of work!
I think you know better and You canbe sure i would like to know more too.
seven
04-07-2004, 10:54 AM
Ok, I get what you mean.
But this is about the clubs in the German league, not about the national squad, which is a different issue.
(the swiss league is very rich too but international swiss players are less good than they used to be ten years ago => it isn't linked)
The money of the national squad depends mainly on what the government gives to its badminton federation...
About german workers, your figures are clearly wrong. No country can provide such a salary to its workers.
To give you an idea, the minimum salary in France is approx 6-7 dollars/hour and the average salary is less than twice this value. Salaries in Germany are similar, maybe slightly higher.
The highest salaries can be found in Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden, Denmark) and maybe in Switzerland.
jamesd20
04-07-2004, 11:46 AM
Ok, I get what you mean.
The highest salaries can be found in Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden, Denmark) and maybe in Switzerland.
Iread somewher ethat the swiss had the highest average income (GDP) at 54000US$ and the UK was second with around 36000$.
If the minimumwage in france is 6-7$ how come people get less than half the Minimum? is the law not enforced properly?
seven
04-07-2004, 12:35 PM
[...] how come people get less than half the Minimum? is the law not enforced properly?
less than twice, not half! :)
(otherwise it wouldn't be a minimum)
and it is the "median" income rather than "average" income in fact...
jkusmanto
04-07-2004, 01:59 PM
I suspect Indonesia decline in badminton is related more to politics, organizational issues rather than talent shortage. :rolleyes:
Agree. But you must add one thing more : Money.
Indonesia hasn't shortage of talent.
There are many talents, especially in Java.
Usually the big clubs do a "journey" to the villages to look for a nature talents.
They bring these young players to their club, give them a good education and training. Hoping that one day one or more players can be chosen by PBSI and become a star.
PBSI does a "search" and take the best players of the clubs to Pelatnas (National Training Centre). Some of the players can survay, but most of them fail due to the training methode defferences between club and Pelatnas.
Years ago the best clubs asked PBSI to set a "main guide line of training" together. So the players can't get shock when they train in Pelatnas.
I don't know whether PBSI has already doen what the clubs asked.
viver
04-07-2004, 11:39 PM
Agree. But you must add one thing more : Money.
Indonesia hasn't shortage of talent.
There are many talents, especially in Java.
Usually the big clubs do a "journey" to the villages to look for a nature talents.
They bring these young players to their club, give them a good education and training. Hoping that one day one or more players can be chosen by PBSI and become a star.
PBSI does a "search" and take the best players of the clubs to Pelatnas (National Training Centre). Some of the players can survay, but most of them fail due to the training methode defferences between club and Pelatnas.
Years ago the best clubs asked PBSI to set a "main guide line of training" together. So the players can't get shock when they train in Pelatnas.
I don't know whether PBSI has already doen what the clubs asked.
I do not know the problems affecting Indonesian badminton nowadays. You could be right, money could be a factor.
I am not clear how players train in clubs and what's the difference when in national team. Thought that in national team the players would need to be stronger physically and refine their skills. Is really a big difference between what they do in clubs and what they do in national team? Today I can't distinguish an Indonesian with a Chinese player - playing style wise.
taneepak
04-08-2004, 01:06 AM
There is no mystery or magic to why top players of different countries have different competitive life span. It is strictly a simple case of supply and demand at a given point in time. Yang Yang had a comparatively longer life span as a top player because that was exactly the then supply/demand situation at that point in time. Taufit, that spoilt kid with an attitude to match his arrogance, is still there, again because of Indonesia' current supply/demand situation. I don't think the way players of different countries play, whether fast and explosive or slower and more crafty, have anything to do with how long they stay at the top. This is why other countries are falling behind China in mens singles. The gap will be even wider in the years to come. Lin Dan and Bao may be the stars now. I doubt they will be where they are today in 3 years' time, by which time there will be more super Lin Dans. Don't forget the lion and the zebra story : competition begets competition, which begets yet more competition and yet better champions.
I won't totally agree, of course China will continue to dominate.Many say China has a vast pool of players, how come only the 1st four are good and the rest down the line are so poor compared to other players from other countries
and why is doubles so poor?
Friends who travel to ina regularly to play tours and friendlies in Ina are shocked by the quality and quantity of ina youngsters but only the lucky ones get exported.
I think players get better with age eg Sun Jun, Hendrawan,Peter Gade etc.
it will be boring to play badminton based purely on speed and power, how coma Bao lost in the 2002 Thomas Cup semis and again in the 2003 Sudriman semis?
Is there an element missing in his game or do you think he'll get better and wiser?
Talent and skill I think is something someone is born with.
How many players today have the net skill of Hendrawan
or Rudy Hartono, or Yang Yang and Zhao?
How many players have a "Third Eye" of Zhao.
I'm not saying skill is everything, it could be an extra to keep one going.
Players in Msia cannot afford to retire at 25, they have to keep on playing until they are 30 to continue earning.
Are there many younsters who can beat Wong Choon Han?
viver
04-08-2004, 10:12 PM
One thing is playing on tournaments another thing is how they play during training sessions. The no. 1 Chinese player may not be the best player in the training squad.
1) Why is Zhang Ning still in national tean at age 28
and after 10 years.
2) Why is Kim Dong Moon and ra Kyun Min unbeaten and they are approaching 30.
3) Why was Ge Fei/Gu Jun asked to retire at 25 ?
Is it because younger players are in abundance who can beat them.
Dont you think they have valuable experience and also additional talent to stay ahead?
taneepak
04-09-2004, 12:36 AM
1) Why is Zhang Ning still in national tean at age 28
and after 10 years.
2) Why is Kim Dong Moon and ra Kyun Min unbeaten and they are approaching 30.
3) Why was Ge Fei/Gu Jun asked to retire at 25 ?
Is it because younger players are in abundance who can beat them.
Dont you think they have valuable experience and also additional talent to stay ahead?
Answers to the above :
1. Simple case of supply and demand, as she is still the best in China.
2. Again supply and demand : who do you think in Korea can replace them now?
3. Again supply and demand.
China has abundant supply cant they simply pick a pair who can beat Kim and Ra?
China has abundant supply cant they simply pick a pair who can beat Kim and Ra?
quantity does not replace quality.
if there is such a magical pair, i am sure Li Yongbo will have used them already.
In Zhang Ning's case it may be supply and demand basically but I think there is sth unusual abt her,
How many players at 28 can last the pace of strenous GP tournaments and how many players can have her accuracy, vision and skill? I think she stands for quality.
Ge Fei and gu Jun was asked to leave to make for an abundance of new players, I suppose it can be supply and demand.
In Yang Yang 's case At age 27 in 1990 he was all washed up and won nothing (I think) in 1990 and was retained by China mainly for his experience in Thomas Cup and Asian Games. After that he complained about not being able to take the hardship of training at his age.
In Zhao's case by 1992 when he was 27 he did not win anything, he was retained just to play the Thomas Cup, which he lost.
You could say it was supply and demand but experience counts in team events like Thomas Cup , Sudirman or Asian Games.
viver
04-09-2004, 03:12 AM
It's hard to say why some retire earlier than others. Pressure from younger players, lack of motivation could be factors. Zhang Ning is still playing probably because she still wants to play. At 28 is not old to play, that depends how you play your game. A few times I mentioned that I prefer watching the ladies playing as men game seems to lost quality after Zhao JH, YY, Kusuma, Joko Suprianto retired.
Yang Yang as I heard, left because he was not able to take the training. He noticed other opportunities better than continuing playing. He is not the only one doing this. I know at least another really talented player from China who gave up because he found other opportunities. He was rated better than the then China singles champion, but too bad for badminton his mind was elsewhere.
China indeed produces/develops tons of players. Like Kwun mentioned, quality and not quantity is needed. Theoretically speaking you have greater chance of finding the player you need from greater pool. There are many factors that influence the quality of players being developed, coaches is one of them. You may have the numbers, but you still someboby with a good eye and pick the right ones. Again, it was not just coincidence that China is stronger with Wong Wenjiao, Hou Jiachang and Tang Xianfu as coaches. When Wong, Hou retired and Tang coaching in Indonesia, China fell behind and was not as dominant but instead Indonesia rose. Tang returned to China and now China is much stronger and both men's singles and doubles! Coincidence?
I dont think Tanneepak is wrong, just about everything is
related to survival of the fittest.
It is just the implications and danger of relating
everything to market forces that frightens me eg.
Some smart aleck in China thinks that since there is no
war in the next 10 years ie, no demand for soldiers and
weapons, why not stop supply until there is demand.Then
some big bully senses the opportunity and decides to raid
the country at its weakest, that is short-sightedness.I'm sure we all need to invest in the long term, if market forces prevail Chen Hong, Bao Lin Dan etc would have been fired long ago for losing every now and then.
Then this question of jungle law, lion and zebra.
I'm sure there is a limit to human performance, check all
Olympics records,eg 100 m sprints, 1968 9.98 secs, how
many people today can run under 10 seconds? How about
long jump;high jump, swimming,cycling etc are records
tumbling every year?Can lions and zebras run faster today than 10 years ago?
not saying anyone is wrong though , just that it may not
be as simple.
taneepak
04-10-2004, 01:00 AM
China has abundant supply cant they simply pick a pair who can beat Kim and Ra?
Even China's best MD, a product of, yes supply/demand, is not good enough to come anywhere Kim/Ra, who are still there, again because of supply/demand which says that they are still the best in Korea.
taneepak
04-10-2004, 01:08 AM
Lions of yesterday, if they were roaming in Africa today, would die of hunger as they would not be able to catch their prey, today's zebra, which through survival of the fittest, is a far cry from zebras of gone by eras. A better example would be cockcroaches. Remember those chemists with their pest or cockcroach killers that promised to wipe off all cockcroaches once and for all?
Probably true of Virus strain too.
Change in physhical nature of humans probably takes long time.
Surely not in 1 generation of athletes eg. Olympics.
Demand /Supply is usually used in microeconomics to describe market
forces,associated with heartless politicians and accountants.maybe there are more accurate terms (I cant think of any).
Used elsewhere in other areas supply/demand creates some confusion.
Maybe there are more accurate terms to use, anyone can think of any?
I can think of some,
Competition to Survive, Excess Supply, etc
I know what you mean and can ead between the lines,
i only said that using an economics term ike demandsupply can
be misinterpreted.
taneepak
04-10-2004, 03:30 AM
Demand and supply is sometimes assumed to be the monopoly of the business world. It is not. Take for example a game like badminton. Lets say China needs to select players for the Thomas cup. There is an immediate demand for players, 3 singles and two pairs of doubles, to represent China. Now comes the supply, which comes in their thousands. But there are only 7 slots, no more. So, who gets the slots? Not every Tom, Dick, or Harry, I will bet you. If the best are picked, then it is demand and supply. If the best are not picked, then it is cronyism.
Dont you think there is a problemthen?
How does one define best? Merit, loyalty, obedient, skillfull ?
Consistent performance over a period of time or the right players for the
situation?Some will be dissatisfied.
I know what you are implying, and I think we better not talk further about it
in China they have laws against dissenters .
Maybe in other Asian countries too.
cappy75
04-10-2004, 10:43 AM
Last time I heard, Germany is one of the most highly taxed countries in the world. One might earn more over there and standard of living is high, cost of living is also high:(.
Dont take my statements too seriously,
I heard from some Europeans that the German League offers the highest prizes.
And beside German workers I heard are World's highest paid.80US $ an hour of work!
I think you know better and You canbe sure i would like to know more too.
viver
04-10-2004, 03:51 PM
Some players play best in open tournaments some are more suitable for team competitions. Selecting the right ones in not easy and depends on the coaches criteria (or luck!?).
taneepak
04-10-2004, 09:25 PM
Some players play best in open tournaments some are more suitable for team competitions. Selecting the right ones in not easy and depends on the coaches criteria (or luck!?).
The key is to select a team of players that has the highest chance of achieving an objective. If the coaches or selectors consistently make mistakes, there are checks and balances in the system to handle that, and that includes sacking the coaches/selectors. If there is no such system in place, then it is cronyism, with players who are closer to the coaches/selectors being selected over other better players. This is the reason why true professionalism in the governance of sports is imperative and vital.
Cronyism has its advantages it develops long term cooperation and teamwork for things that take ages to bear fruit.
Kiasuism learnt from the British can breed fighting cocks
with no teanm spirit or a sense of community, vagabonds.
Where would Taiwan be or even Korea, Japan without cronyism? What has Chen Sui Bian done for Taiwan?
Anyway hasnt Ina won the thomas Cup many times in a row, isn't china showing results in last few years in GP tours?
Better stop now or this thread will be locked.
viver
04-11-2004, 04:12 PM
The key is to select a team of players that has the highest chance of achieving an objective. If the coaches or selectors consistently make mistakes, there are checks and balances in the system to handle that, and that includes sacking the coaches/selectors. If there is no such system in place, then it is cronyism, with players who are closer to the coaches/selectors being selected over other better players. This is the reason why true professionalism in the governance of sports is imperative and vital.
My experience is very limited when coming to these issues. The only thing I know is when you win everything is OK but if you lose whatever you did is wrong and might be dismissed. Even the blame is not yours. Can't think of an example in badminton right now, but if you follow football look at Real Madrid - the previous coach was dismissed for failing the objectives. The coach asked for defensive midfielders for sometime and the president got him Zidane and Ronaldo. Current coach when hired also mentioned they needed strong defensive players. The managers did not renew Hierro contract and hired Beckham (defensive player??). Objectives this year also not achieved (at least they did not win the Champions league nor their FA Cup) and will now see what happens to the coach.
I think references were made to remarks about LYB and the minister in chinabadminton.com.
I think it is a common traid in many societies to follow traits of former masters, individualism,
bugger you jack ,I'm alright, which even the british are abandoning.
nit-picking etc, fussing about little things without seeing the big picture.Then refering to traditional Asian practices as cronyism.
A chief coach in Msia once dropped a rising champion saying "he has no future".
Wang Wen Jiao dropped a champion because he was a gambler, and Wang said, gamblers cannot make good players.
I think it is better to be specific and not to speak in riddles, also more tn 50 % of the posters are under 16 years, we should be careful what we say.
Cheung
04-11-2004, 06:47 PM
Better stop now or this thread will be locked.If the thread moves to politics, yes. Pretty much standing on the limits. ;)
Alright :
1) We should be careful what we read in china Forums, they may be postings by people employed by the CIA, remember the spy plane and spy gadgets in the presidential jet?
2) inconsistency , if cronyism is bad, why is Taufik challenging PBSI producing bad badminton players, isn't he speaking out against cronyism.
3) If China loses 2004 T cup I will not be surprised, they can send anyone and still lose.This is because the Indonesians will work themselves to a frenzy and play above themselves just once this year and not go round chasing aftr cash tournament after tournament.What has it got to do with selection ?
Right lets put theory into practice, watch the Japen Doubles
1) Kim /Ha bt Cai/Fu in set1, Tian Bing Yi tells them to play differently. Ca//fu win set 2. Parl Joo Bong rells Kim/Ha to play differently, Cai/Fu have no coaching now, they cant think for themselves, they lose.
2) Ra/Lee beat Zhao/Wei in set 1, Tian tells Zhao/Wei to play differently, Zhao /Wei win set 2. Then Park tells Ra/Lee to play differently. Zhao/Wei cannot change, no coaching and they lose.
From above who do we sack 1) Tian Bing Yi for promoting cronyism, not allwing players to think for themselves?
2) Players as they are products of supply/demand, make way for better players! esp Cai/Fu. surely there are many
mens doubles players in China to replace them!
This discussion on supply/demand theory in badminton seems rather simplistic. Hopefully, we are talking about the supply and demand of TOP QUALITY players NOT just the abundance of even 'talented' players found in such large numbers is populous China and Indonesia.
But how does one measure quality and WHO are the judges and final selectors? Personal preferences, favouritism, bias and cronyism will inevitably come into the picture.
There are arguments for, and I would support this method for want of a better one, allowing coaches to make the final selection as they are closest to the players and really know their abilities and current form, but if you have different coaches for the same event, there will be a fight among them to have their own trainees selected. Of course you can have a panel of coaches to make the final selection, but one cannot escape their subjective 'personal bias' in their decision-making. It will be even worse if you leave it to a so-called neutral selection committee who has no direct contact with the players and purely based their judgement on reports.
Objectivity, based on a number of measurements by the professional coaches may not be that easy, for other than pure skills, they may value other factors like discipline, mental strength, ability to focuss full attention and giving one's best in training, etc. In the end it may be more rewarding to keep a player whose discipline and attention during training is above reproach, and as pointed out, experience may also be a vital factor for team events.
For this reason, although Xia Xuanze may be lower ranked in the world than young Bao Chunlai, Xia could well be selected to represent China in both the TC and the Olympics. Based on supply/demand theory, Bao should be selected because of his better performance on paper. Will the selection of Xia, which is a possibility, fall under cronyism or favouritism?
taneepak
04-12-2004, 03:17 AM
I think we are splitting hairs here. What I mean by supply and demand is that any national team must be professionally selected by a competent system and not one that is based on cronyism. Different countries may have different selection systems and if they professionally managed then there is little room for cronyism. A nation's badminton association may appoint a head coach after careful selection and entrust him with the power as well as the responsibility of coming up with a winning team. Like English Premier League soccer, if the coach fails more often than he wins, he gets the boot. This is professionalism. If he stays even after repeated losses and chalks up a losing streak worse than his predecessor, then somebody ought to be asking questions. Now, if the head coach is the president's son, you might have cronyism or you might not, except that if things go wrong it is very difficult to boot him out. The people who appraise the head coach's performance should be the management, be it the badminton association or the management committee.
I am not privy to any rumours or stories of discords in selection controversies or cronyism, so my opinions are a 'stand alone' discourse on this thread.
There is no mystery or magic to why top players of different countries have different competitive life span. It is strictly a simple case of supply and demand at a given point in time. Yang Yang had a comparatively longer life span as a top player because that was exactly the then supply/demand situation at that point in time. Taufit, that spoilt kid with an attitude to match his arrogance, is still there, again because of Indonesia' current supply/demand situation. I don't think the way players of different countries play, whether fast and explosive or slower and more crafty, have anything to do with how long they stay at the top. This is why other countries are falling behind China in mens singles. The gap will be even wider in the years to come. Lin Dan and Bao may be the stars now. I doubt they will be where they are today in 3 years' time, by which time there will be more super Lin Dans. Don't forget the lion and the zebra story : competition begets competition, which begets yet more competition and yet better champions.
Any relation?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.4 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.