Cai/Fu were demolished by Lin and Tazari. I was there watching...Cai/Fu were not injured, not playing too badly, they were destroyed. Plain and simple.

Lin/Tazari, Abdul/Gan were incredible to watch in the AE. Breathtaking in defence/counterattack, and always looking out to attack. Oh yes, they are ligtning fast as well. To top it all off, they don't give up easily and have good mental strength.

In the semis, Gan was unfairly penalised for SIX TIMES by the service judge agaist danes number 1 pair in the first set, SIX TIMES!!! Otherwise, Abdul/Gan could have won that tie too and made it an all Malaysian affair. The umpire also disallowed numerous requests to change shuttle and wipe down by the Malaysian pair, and that must have unsettled them...very unfair match tbh :mad: If Gan's service was really that bad, why was it only noticed in the semis? There is definitely something there that I dont agree with.

Choong/Lee had nothing to offer in the Finals against the danes, the danes were more stable and made less errors. In contrast, Choong/Lee were like school boys. Lin/Tazari basically handed the match to Choong/Lee in the semis, they were not playing to their true form at all (actually more like practising only). Unlike 2004, the danes deserved the win in this Finals.

For the future, MAS have about 4 to 5 strong pairs to rely on, but I think Choong/Lee should make way soon. All in all, the young pairs must learn to win under all conditions, be it biased judging, wind draft...anything.

Good Job for MAS MD, we will definitely see more of them in the future.
MAS MD:
1. CCM/KKK
2. CTF/LWW
3. Lin/Tazari
4. Abdul/Gan
5. Tan/Ong

Oh btw, I am a certified badminton coach in UK, and I did not see anything really wrong with Gan's serves at all.

i just can't imagine how i would react if i was penalised 6 times by the service judge.:rolleyes:

i just can't imagine how i would react if i was penalised 6 times by the service judge.:rolleyes:

I would have walked off, but then that would be bad for my partner :p

Penalized 6 times by the service judge !!! What a shame to AE organizer...like wl2171 said, why the service fault was not caught duing semi-finals, or quarter finals ??? Fire the judge !

Penalized 6 times by the service judge !!! What a shame to AE organizer...like wl2171 said, why the service fault was not caught duing semi-finals, or quarter finals ??? Fire the judge !

Too late now.....damage has been done :crying:

why can't the umpire over rule such a stupendous act! is he blind?

why can't the umpire over rule such a stupendous act! is he blind?

He could have....but he did not. Enough said...

anybody got a picture of such a faulted serve?

I did not take any pics, there were officials walking about who did not like people taking pictures. Also, the action was too fast to capture good pictures unless you are a reporter sat beside the court.

The Malaysian players are short and stocky. Compared to tall and lengthy players, they would seem to serve "above waist". In reality, Gan's motion while serving is very good, and does not suggest at all that he is cheating and serving above waist. After being faulted 6 times, his serving confidence was shot to bits and he was trying to go as low as possible. This resulted in the MAS pair having only 1 valid server throughout the whole match. Even then, they played well and looked the stronger pair compared to the danes.

I am very disappointed at the way that match was conducted. If the organisers felt that having an all Malaysian affair was not good for the finals, shame to them. Either way, I am convinced that if the judging was fair, Abdul/Gan would have won the 1st set and the match subsequently. They were clearly better that night.

6 times! That was too much! Thinking abt it, there was a controversial call too last year when Cai/Fu played against the other danish pair in the final.The chinese were angry at first but then they accepted it. Maybe they knew that it won't change anything by arguing or else they might end up getting a yellow card as well.At last, they won the game. I think the AE judges are famous now for their unfair calls since AE 2004.

To sum it all, this is pure daylight robbery on a badminton court!:mad:
How could this happen in the most prestigious event in badminton?:confused: :mad:

I did not take any pics, there were officials walking about who did not like people taking pictures. Also, the action was too fast to capture good pictures unless you are a reporter sat beside the court.

The Malaysian players are short and stocky. Compared to tall and lengthy players, they would seem to serve "above waist". In reality, Gan's motion while serving is very good, and does not suggest at all that he is cheating and serving above waist. After being faulted 6 times, his serving confidence was shot to bits and he was trying to go as low as possible. This resulted in the MAS pair having only 1 valid server throughout the whole match. Even then, they played well and looked the stronger pair compared to the danes.

I am very disappointed at the way that match was conducted. If the organisers felt that having an all Malaysian affair was not good for the finals, shame to them. Either way, I am convinced that if the judging was fair, Abdul/Gan would have won the 1st set and the match subsequently. They were clearly better that night.
so it was faulted for height, and not the "shaft pointing up"....

real bummer...woudl have loved to see those two...

6 times! That was too much! Thinking abt it, there was a controversial call too last year when Cai/Fu played against the other danish pair in the final.The chinese were angry at first but then they accepted it. Maybe they knew that it won't change anything by arguing or else they might end up getting a yellow card as well.At last, they won the game. I think the AE judges are famous now for their unfair calls since AE 2004.

All England is actually a very well oganised tournament, punctual, good security, good website/online scoring and nice atmosphere. However, the judging for the MD leaves a lot to be desired. Rigging matches via umpires is not cool by any measure, but this is pure speculation as there can never be any proof for this sort of cases.

May I assume the line judge is Jane something who refereed the controversial 2004 MD final? Hope this will not damage this prestigious tournament.

The malaysians were called against a few times in the finals aswell i noticed same problem racket head to high i think :confused: It could be that the whole team was generally a bit lax? howver i was slighty bemused at the time

May I assume the line judge is Jane something who refereed the controversial 2004 MD final? Hope this will not damage this prestigious tournament.

Here we go again with Jane Hancock

Cai/Fu were demolished by Lin and Tazari. I was there watching...Cai/Fu were not injured, not playing too badly, they were destroyed. Plain and simple.

Did anyone record this match? Would be interesting to watch.

The malaysians were called against a few times in the finals aswell i noticed same problem racket head to high i think :confused: It could be that the whole team was generally a bit lax? howver i was slighty bemused at the time

I was there in the NIA from Thursday watching the whole tournament till Sunday. Never have I seen a player faulted 6 times in 1 set. No matter what, Gan's confidence in serving was pretty much shattered. Also, the point I am trying to make here is that if his service is really that illegal (which I don't think it is), why was it only spotted in the semi-final stage? Why wasn't he cautioned in rounds 1-3 or the quarterfinals? Were the previous 4 service umpires all wrong? Highly unlikely. This is my argument.

Jane Hancock was not involved here at all FYI :p

Did anyone record this match? Would be interesting to watch.

I am sorry Yannie, that match only lives in my memory :) .

I remember Cai/FU trying to outpace them but failed, they then tried to attack but never really got much chance to unleash their lethal attack. Cai/Fu played the wrong tactics that day, they should have tried slowing the game down but instead they chose to up the speed. Also, I noticed LYB walking away in displeasure in game 2, not a very supportive move in my opinion.

LYB is a military dictatorial superior, not surprise for his action.

Also, I think IBF needs to do something about this stupid serving rule. How can anyone tell if the birdie or racquet head is one inche above the waist line.

I can understand it is a valid call if the position is held too high and too obvious (something like more than 2 inches above). But for cases where its not so obvious and its up to the lines man to judge......I would argue for it.

Penalizing a player 6 times is a big humiliation to BAM. It sends out the message "hey BAM, you got to teach your boys how to serve right before you come to play here" <img>

After all, how much difference does it make if a player is slightly above the legal line......this is a sports, not supreme court. If AE organizer wants to play legal matters, learn high tech equipments and get video cameras instead.....like what the NFL does "Undisputable video evidence".

Also, I think IBF needs to do something about this stupid serving rule. How can anyone tell if the birdie or racquet head is one inche above the waist line.


Come to think of it, I kinda agree. It also gives advantage to the taller person. However, I still think that:

1. the handle of the racket should be higher than where the shuttle is struck (or the racquet head)

2. the shuttle must go in an upward trajectory.

In the new point-a-rally scoring system, the serve is so important. The pressure is all on the server. I think we should consider changing the rules to even out the disadvantage to the server. I think points should be scored mostly during rallies and less dependant on serves. Maybe

3. take out the long service line.

But these are fundamental changes. If we cannot even accept non-fundamental changes(*) like scoring, then there is no hope for these suggestions.

* Non-fundamental changes are changes which should not affect your play. You should always try to win a rally whether you serve or you receive.

Read in the newspaper that malaysian team has sent a protest to the organizer.But why couldn't they protest during the match?Seems that this has affected LWW/CTF's concentration in the final as well and they couldn't play true to their ability.

Read in the newspaper that malaysian team has sent a protest to the organizer.But why couldn't they protest during the match?Seems that this has affected LWW/CTF's concentration in the final as well and they couldn't play true to their ability.

Protesting is pointless if people are already prejudiced againts you. They will only turn a deaf ear or make up some silly excuses. The only way to combat this problem is to perform well and beat your opponents without any doubt. Gan should have blocked this out of him and carried on with his game, they would have won in that case as Abdul was very calm in contrast.

The only way to combat this problem is to perform well and beat your opponents without any doubt.

ahaa, yes, that should be the way, i couldn't more agree on that. don't let "bad" call affects your game so much.

He could have....but he did not. Enough said...

Yes enough said. That must mean he agreed with the call and the service was bad.

Rigging matches via umpires is not cool by any measure, but this is pure speculation as there can never be any proof for this sort of cases.

Yes PURE speculation. The fact that you even bring it up speaks for itself :(


It is never fun to see the pair you are cheering for losing but a least try to be dignified in defeat...
I personally think Jens and Martin played fantastic in the two last matches (except 1st part of the 1st game in the semifinal and 2nd part of the 2nd game in the final). Maybe that has something to do with the fact that they won ;)
Lets not forget that Jens and Martin for the past 18 months have ranked either 1 or 2 in the world. It is no shame to lose to such a pair.

It is never fun to see the pair you are cheering for losing but a least try to be dignified in defeat...


You can say all you want, the pair you were cheering won. Also, I am not taking anything away from Jens/Martin, they are brilliant and consistent as far as I am concerned. However, please see from our point of view as well. I dont think you will be singing this song if the danes were on the receiving end since 2004. To happen twice is not good at all.

Dignified.....stop patronising us.

Yes enough said. That must mean he agreed with the call and the service was bad.


You haven't explained my argument yet.....why wasn't Gan caught in the FIRST 4 rounds of the tournament? Were all the previous service umpires wrong?

Please explain....if you cannot, don't bother replying. I want constructive arguments.

I'm pretty certain that he was faulted for not having the racket head below the hand. The service judge indicated the fault by pointing his hand in an upward direction, and later when Gan queried the decision the service judge clearly motiined that he was 'coming over the top'. Replays on the screen were not conclusive, but it certainly was very close.

I have no idea why it was wasn't brought up earlier in the tournament though.

Anyway the future does look bright for Malaysian MD. Rexy's influence is already noticeable. Yap Kim Hock certainly seemed quite happy about it when we were talking to him in the Sports Bar on Broad St on Saturday night! :D

The service rules have been in place for a long time. It applies to everybody tall or short.

Granted that tall players appear to have an advantage, however, we have also seen how even short players can also execute effortless 'perfect' serves that their tall opponents cannot take adavantage of!

I feel that coaches may have taken this crucial aspect of the game for granted for too long. The Gan case is not an isolated one as we have seen time and again 'fault service' being called on other international players as well. It is high time that they pay more attention to the technicalities of the serve so that their players will not have to suffer under the bright lights in international tournaments and have their confidence shattered during crucial matches.

Players will not be able to judge themselves whether they are doing the serve correctly, so coaches and trainers must tell and warn them if there is any doubt of this in training. Better still have their serves shown on pics or videos. In an eagerness to take full advantage of striking the shuttle at a higher height so that the serve is flatter and the time take to reach the opponent's side shorter, there is always the danger that the contact point is higher than waist level and the racket is held higher than the hand holding it.

So please don't blame the service judge, who are normally neutral. Blame the players and their coaches for not doing a good job themselves. :o

OK, calm down now.

Umpiring and judging is supposed to be neutral and consistent. Unfortunately, that is impossible since us poor humans have to do the job. In general, I would say that there is a high number of questionable serves that don't get faulted. Some service judges are more lax than others. Some are perhaps too strict. This is something that all players know, and have to learn to handle.

Assuming that Gan's serves were indeed illegal (which I don't know), it is natural to wonder why he wasn't faulted earlier on. But one could also argue that he was lucky to get as far as the semi before being faulted. ;)

Saying that the umpires and judges are biased is a bit strong. They can be accused of being inconsistent, as the same individuals can't judge or umpire every match. That a British service judge would be biased towards a Danish pair just doesn't make sense.

Isn't it is also possible that Gan, in his serve, was pressed to the limit against the Danes? Gan is not a very experienced player yet, and certainly Jens is one of the tallest (if not the tallest) players on the tour. If a player is prone to service errors, having a 2 meter guy hanging on the net isn't going to help. :p

So please don't blame the service judge, who are normally neutral. Blame the players and their coaches for not doing a good job themselves. :o

I am a Malaysian and when Gan was faulted five or six times, I was thinking that the service jugde was bias. Nervertheless, I kept on telling myself that the service judge is neutral and would not favour any party or would not pick on Gan if his serves were good.

But Rexy, our new doubles coach, stated that AE umpires, service judges or linemen tend to pick on players from Asia! I was shocked to hear this especially when it came from Rexy, a pro player and coach. Rexy was actually commenting on RTM1 after LWW/CTK finals. He said that he found the umpire and service jugde treated Gan/Zakry unfairly. He even went on to say that during his playing days which he had won 2 AE titles, he suffered the same unfair treatments!

Who knows? Maybe he is just sour. :rolleyes:

Isn't it is also possible that Gan, in his serve, was pressed to the limit against the Danes? Gan is not a very experienced player yet, and certainly Jens is one of the tallest (if not the tallest) players on the tour. If a player is prone to service errors, having a 2 meter guy hanging on the net isn't going to help. :p

I think that is very possible that Gan was affected somehow in the final and therefore served in a marginally different manner than in previous matches.

That would also explain why he wasn't faulted (or not faulted to the same extent) in previous games.

I've had a similar thing happen to my serve. Unwillingly, the head of the racket starts pointing upwards more than it should, when I have the notion that the serve is not working - that the opponent is "killing" it too easily. Then I want the serve to be more flat.. and if it is still not working.. well.. then I start changing the service movement just a bit..

Not that I am like the pros, but the pros are human like the rest of us, so I am guessing that it could be an explanation that Gan was under more pressure, was more nervous, in the finals than in the previous games, and that this has affected his serve.

I am a Malaysian and when Gan was faulted five or six times

Hi,

I think almost everyone in modern game serves against the rule (above waist) - however, I also think it is utterly difficult for the judge to make a proper call. Where can you see the "waist line" anyway, hidden under a long shirt? I don't envy the serve judges at all.

I have watched many games live and from video, and rarely have I seen a short serve that I could honestly call correct...

It is a bit like the walk races in athletics where everybody is breaking the rule "one foot must touch the ground at all times". Everybody. The judges single out a few in each race, since it is impossible to disqualify all the competitors...

Maybe something should be done to the serving rule... but what?

Ari Husa

You haven't explained my argument yet.....why wasn't Gan caught in the FIRST 4 rounds of the tournament? Were all the previous service umpires wrong?

Please explain....if you cannot, don't bother replying. I want constructive arguments.


How should I be able to explain why he wasn't faulted earlier in the tournament when I didn't see these matches? :p
I can only speculate which is what you are doing too IMHO ;)
Maybe the service judges were less strict in Gans/Zakrys first matches and they let him get away with it.
Maybe his service was ok in their first matches but in the semifinal they were under such tremendous pressure that he just crumbled. They are after all still a young and inexperienced pair.

I cannot boast about being a "certified badminton coach", but I did hear the Danish commentators (one of the Poul-Erik Hoyer Larsen) saying that the racquet head was not pointing down when Gan served.
Sure they may be biased but so are you, so are we all.

After seeing the MD semi's In my opinion Jens/Martin would have lost the first game, if Gan's serves hadn't been judged the way they were. The Malaysians really put some pressure to Jens/Martins backhand side in the beginning of the first game. However around 5-13 the danes changed their tactics and really got hold on their backhand side defense, which changed their luck.

About serving errors: The serving situation is crucial in MD, and most players serve on the edge of the "not above the waist" rule. But that serve error is quite hard to spot especially when the server leans forward (very difficult to point out the location of the lowest rip.

The other serve error is much easier to call, as the racquet and the hand is visible at all times. In Gan's case his racquet was almost horizontal (I saw the game on national danish television, and in most of the cases the racquet's head wasn't clearly below the hand). Sitting 3 m away I guess the serving judge would have a better view than all off us.

Well, haven't seen Gan serve before, so I will not comment on why he wasn't faulted before the semi's. But if you are pushing your serves to the limit, you should have a "safe" serve to fall back to. If you are faulted once, you can expect to be faulted again if you don't respond (in this case by raising your hand or lowering your racquet)

But Rexy, our new doubles coach, stated that AE umpires, service judges or linemen tend to pick on players from Asia! I was shocked to hear this especially when it came from Rexy, a pro player and coach. Rexy was actually commenting on RTM1 after LWW/CTK finals. He said that he found the umpire and service jugde treated Gan/Zakry unfairly.

i am not surprised that the coach would say that for their players, the same thing happened to INA coach, i read from the news that after Candra/Sigit lost to CTF/LWW, the INA coach said that the service judge also faulted Candra's service 6 times.

i am not surprised that the coach would say that for their players, the same thing happened to INA coach, i read from the news that after Candra/Sigit lost to CTF/LWW, the INA coach said that the service judge also faulted Candra's service 6 times.

Ok, i conclude that AE jugdes are not prejudice against Asian players then but can you show us the article where the INA coach said that. I could not cite Rexy's cause it was said orally but it was on national TV.

I watched the semi on tv, I would agree that the services WERE faults, the racket head is clearly level with the hand, however the fact that they had played through the other rounds and not been faulted shows the inconsistency in service judging. I noted many other fault serves not called while I was there, many service judges seem to take a few looks at a serve before calling a fault and are reluctant to fault every time.

Where the Malaysians were clearly disadvantaged was in the way the Danes were allowed to dominate the speed of the game, not changing the shuttle, telling the malaysians to be quiet, wasting time when they were coming back etc, all helped them to break the malaysian concentration and win the first end

LYB is a military dictatorial superior, not surprise for his action.

In contrast I thought I heard him encouraging Lin Dan, who had fallen badly in the second game against Lee Hyun Il in the final. And that worked wonders for Lin who managed to fight on gallantly and completely surprised even Lee, who was unable to capitalize on Lin's setback and lost gamely in the end. :)

IWhere the Malaysians were clearly disadvantaged was in the way the Danes were allowed to dominate the speed of the game, not changing the shuttle, telling the malaysians to be quiet, wasting time when they were coming back etc, all helped them to break the malaysian concentration and win the first end

The danes were also allowed a towel break when the same umpire had previously refused the Malaysian twice.

Ok, i conclude that AE jugdes are not prejudice against Asian players then but can you show us the article where the INA coach said that. I could not cite Rexy's cause it was said orally but it was on national TV.

http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0601/20/or/2381724.htm

You are Malaysian, so I suppose you can understand bahasa indonesia as well.

below is the part where the INA manager said that.
”Sejak pindah tempat banyak mati sendiri, servis nyangkut. Servis mereka juga di-fault enam kali. Candra/Sigit sempat protes, tetapi itu mengganggu penampilan keduanya,” kata Lius yang dihubungi seusai pertandingan.

BTW, I have a fundamental question on this topic. How can a judge tell where the waist line is ? Everyone's body structure is different, especially when a player does not tuck in the shirt. IBF has a rule that concerns a waist line but there is no rule to mark where the waist line is for each player....kind of stupid. Its like telling everyone the speed limit on the freeway is 75 mph but its up to the traffic cop to judge the speed you are travelling at.

Here is what IBF can do to correct what is missing:

1. Each player has to go through a physical exam to mark where the waist line is and certified by a doctor.

2. Every player is required to tuck in his/her shirt, this is a hard rule...no exception.

3. On the shirt, a red line is drawn to mark the waist line. Any attempt to cover this line is penalized.

4. A laser beam is added to the tip of racquet head. This beam allows the line judge to tell if the head is pointing to the sky, to the horizon or to the ground. A perfect racquet is one that includes a speaker that reads out loud the degree its pointing at such "thirty degree downward" to alert the player. Of course, there is a button on the racquet to turn it on/off....(you think I forgot about this right)

This creates "undisputable high tech evidence"

LOL....that will fix it good!!!!

FYI Everyone:

Gan was faulted for his service actionin previous round, including QF and 3rd Round. I didnot see them play in 1st or second round matches.

He was faulted more commonly in the SF however.

He was faulted for the racket head being above the wrist when serving.

IMO the serves were fault, and even some of them not called were dubious.

He was not put off that much by this, and this is a good sign from him. Lee Wan wah was much worse just for getting a yellow card in AE final 2004.

The Umpires are similar for all tournaments and feel although sometimes the heat ofthe moment gets to them, on the whole they are fair and unbiased. Protesting during matches would kill the game as play would have to be stopped while the problem is mediated. Umpires decision is final.

If rexy and Gan are smart they shall review footage and alter his service action accordingly. And come back stronger. They handled it very well under the circumstances they were under.

MAL MD has bright future on current form.

The danes were also allowed a towel break when the same umpire had previously refused the Malaysian twice.


This was a far worse decision, it was at least 5mins and 8point including long rallies when they were refused, then DEN allowed straight away. Again however they didn't let it affect them. I am very impressed with the temparament and mental strength of them.

Hi guys,

After reading what you all wrote, while as a Malaysian I do feel a bit sad that the way the service judge made his call against our players, and while I agree that it would certainly made a difference to the score of the game and the psychology of the players affected, bear in mind too that the match's not won or lost simply on service only.

If the Malaysians were amazing (more so than already were that day), then somehow, I would like to think that they would still have won despite the unfair service calls. As top professional players, I guess their challenge would be to rise above this type of unfairness and in fact, use it as a motivational tactic to help them be more determined to beat the 'odds' and to win despite the unfairness. It's a case of either relenting because of the fact that the glass was 'half empty' as opposed to concentrating on filling up a glass that was 'half full'.

In any case, 'nasi sudah jadi bubur', so let's focus on the next time when our top men doubles players will rule the world! Malaysia boleh! :D

Cheeky Malaysiankiwi,

Adelina

Cai/Fu were demolished by Lin and Tazari. I was there watching...Cai/Fu were not injured, not playing too badly, they were destroyed. Plain and simple.

Lin/Tazari, Abdul/Gan were incredible to watch in the AE. Breathtaking in defence/counterattack, and always looking out to attack. Oh yes, they are ligtning fast as well. To top it all off, they don't give up easily and have good mental strength.

In the semis, Gan was unfairly penalised for SIX TIMES by the service judge agaist danes number 1 pair in the first set, SIX TIMES!!! Otherwise, Abdul/Gan could have won that tie too and made it an all Malaysian affair. The umpire also disallowed numerous requests to change shuttle and wipe down by the Malaysian pair, and that must have unsettled them...very unfair match tbh :mad: If Gan's service was really that bad, why was it only noticed in the semis? There is definitely something there that I dont agree with.

Choong/Lee had nothing to offer in the Finals against the danes, the danes were more stable and made less errors. In contrast, Choong/Lee were like school boys. Lin/Tazari basically handed the match to Choong/Lee in the semis, they were not playing to their true form at all (actually more like practising only). Unlike 2004, the danes deserved the win in this Finals.

For the future, MAS have about 4 to 5 strong pairs to rely on, but I think Choong/Lee should make way soon. All in all, the young pairs must learn to win under all conditions, be it biased judging, wind draft...anything.

Good Job for MAS MD, we will definitely see more of them in the future.
MAS MD:
1. CCM/KKK
2. CTF/LWW
3. Lin/Tazari
4. Abdul/Gan
5. Tan/Ong


sigit/chandra were was (unfairly) penalised for SIX TIMES by the service judge agaist CTF/LWW :D

So I jump into conclusion, the service fault call does affect a player's concentration during a game and it can be used as a weapon to influence the outcome of a match.......like what happened to AE.

Ok, back to the topic of this thread, do you guys really think that Mal MD has a bright future? Knowing Malaysian, i personally think that 3 pairs in semis were fluke.

Ok, back to the topic of this thread, do you guys really think that Mal MD has a bright future? Knowing Malaysian, i personally think that 3 pairs in semis were fluke.

Quite worried also. I personally think that when we put high hopes and expectations on malaysian players, they will falter. But when they are underdogs, they can perform far above our expectations. So it will be better for us and the malaysian media not to express our expectations to the players.:D

Too late now.....damage has been done :crying:This incident was really absurd:rolleyes: TV1 interviewed Rexy while the XD was playing and he mentioned about sending a letter to IBF about the service faults.

Ok, back to the topic of this thread, do you guys really think that Mal MD has a bright future? Knowing Malaysian, i personally think that 3 pairs in semis were fluke.

I think so, remember Loh Ah Heng! anyone recall??? he is also a AE semifinalist.

Somehow I dont think they will fizzle out like Loh Ah Heng. The young pairs have pretty decent rankings, top 15 if I am not wrong.

I think so, remember Loh Ah Heng! anyone recall??? he is also a AE semifinalist.

Who is Loh Ah Heng? Pls tell more abt him. When did he enter AE semi?

Who is Loh Ah Heng? Pls tell more abt him. When did he enter AE semi?
YOu should go back to 1995(?) to and his s/final against Heryanto Arbi. He nearly won first set!

But that is a topic for another thread - not this one

Don't think you need to go back as far as 1995.

Remember a player called Hafiz, at one point he even won the All England!

Who is Loh Ah Heng? Pls tell more abt him. When did he enter AE semi?
See we are living in BolehLand, everything can happen. :p

I think the Malaysian MD are definately players to watch out in the future.
This was not one good result, but THREE malaysian pairs in the semis, which is a very impressive result.
And these pairs are already well placed in the world rankings, this is not their first good result...
(Choong/Lee were #1 in 2004, Lin/Tazari are currently #11 and Gan/Zakry are #12)