Separate names with a comma.
Thanks for visiting us!
Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.
Click here for a FREE account!
Discussion in 'Olympics LONDON 2012' started by kwun, Aug 1, 2012.
LYB made China, the country, lose face in front of the whole world. Finally the truth is revealed.
I personally think the coaches are to be blame because they the ones who instruct players what to do when they in the court.
The WD players also still just needed to be in the top 2 of the group, they can afford to lose to one pair, just like Michael Johnson can afford to lose to one or two athlete in the heats.
However, there is a distinction because the WD players are deliberately choosing their draw, but in athletics, there is no such thing as a draw; you run with everyone else in the next round. So, there is not even the slightest hint of scandal if Johnson or Bolt does not finish first in the heats.
How about this: "You must try your best to win, but it's the loser that gets the gold."
This reminds me of the riddle where a man told both his sons to race their camels, but the catch is that the one with the slower camel will get all his inheritance. So, it's obvious both sons will try to lose (if the inheritance is what each wants). Of course, we all know (I think) how it ends. Unfortunately, the solution cannot be applied to badminton.
Any of the BWF idiot policy makers get punished yet?
I think the real crime of the WD players is that they made it obvious. It would still have been bad if they gave a walkover or retired with some small made-up injury they do not want to aggravate. There will be some uproar but I'm not they would be DQ'ed for that.
But they just had to go through with the whole shenanigan.
Are u really know what are you talking?:1. BWF is no god, they s*cks for so many years. Therefore their "official words" does not mean right. (I think nowadays in a democratic world, no one would say whatever said by any so-called authorities must be right)2. "Breaking rules" does not equal to "a cheat", u could consult legal consultant for how to accuse people. 3. In fact, they didn't cheat, they want to lose that match and did play to lose.
1. BWF official words means it is "right" for all intensive purposes, untill you start some break off tour (by the way this is not a democratic world hahaha do some reading)
2. Intentionally breaking rules is cheating my friend
3. "In fact, they didn't cheat, they want to lose that match and did play to lose." hahahah it says in the rules not to do this.
Japan's women soccer coach Sakai was forced to defend himself against accusations from other rival coaches for fixing the game against South Africa, by ordering his team not to win. The objective was to internationally place Japan at second place behind Sweden.
FIFA investigated but found insufficient evidence for disciplinary action. Do you think FIFA has a strong record for disciplinary action other than against those involved in internal politics for position jockeying?
Japan had it easier. They only needed a draw, so all they had to do was to not score.
Meanwhile the WD pairs had to score many equivalents of own goals.
Punished for what? They have the power to set the tournament rules. They have the power to determine how those rules are applied and they have the power tell player what loop holes they may or may not exploit.
Was the set up stupid? Yes. Is the BWF incompetent? In my opinion, yes. But, as for punishment, well punishment by who exactly? We can all scream for blood and demand the head of the organisation step down. But step down and be replaced by who?
I wish it was as simple as blaming and/or punishing the BWF but sadly the BWF is merely a reflection of the international badminton community. The problems will not be address by some symbolic gesture such as replacing a figurehead. What this Olympics has illustrated, from the WD fiasco to the WS bronze match is that there is a cultural deficiency in the international badminton community. It is time for the concepts of fair play and sportsmanship to be given more than lip service.
It's funny that through the course of this discussion I've heard many people say that as long as a player behaves in accordance to the letter of the law, the pursuit of the reward is more importance then any consideration of the spirit of that law.
Yet in life away from competition we often hear people rail against people and companies who have behaved in exactly the same way.
I can't "like" the above post enough!
Sorry would you mind clarifying this paragraph please. Think there may be some words missing?
Are you trying to say the letter of the Law was different from the spirit of the law?
The letter of the law is don't throw matches and i think the spirit of the law is don't make us (the bwf and the sport) look like plonkers. Bit confused. That last paragraph as well what were you referring to.
So spot on!
There are no words missing. As it happens the spirit of the law is often different then the letter of the law. But, for my purposes I am restricting things to the context of the issue at hand and not the much broader concept of morality vs legality. In the context of this issue some have argued that the code of conduct around sportsmanship and preservation of the game are mere suggestions and that the WD teams can be excused on this basis. They are wrong.
There are no words missing. If you feel there are some missing words then why keep it a secret? What words are missing? If your really that shy, ask via PM. This really shouldn't be a very hard concept to grasp.
Was not having a dig calm down. I literally just wanted the last paragraph clarified as I didn't understand it, nothing to do with disagreeing with it or any thing like that. This sentence in particular - It's funny that through the course of this discussion I've heard many people say that as long as a player behaves in accordance to the letter of the law, the pursuit of the reward is more importance then any consideration of the spirit of that law - could mean a couple of different things. E.g In between Law and the is it supposed to say "versus" or "but" and "is more importance" is the wrong wording and threw me as well.
I really didn't take it as you having a dig. I just don't like vague criticisms or questions as without specifics it is very hard to address queries in any meaningful manner. I am sorry for the typos but, I'm constantly multitasking here on the computer so, I get sloppy at times, especially when I'm thinking about other things. It also doesn't help that there are 10 or so threads on this topic. So if those typos made deciphering my meaning impossible I apologize. I still though it was possible to figure out what the meaning was.
Anyways basically what the last paragraph means is this;
Some people here and even in the media (NYT) have tried to say that the women shouldn't be DQ'd because the didn't break any codified rule of the game but rather trampled the 'moral' issue of fair play which isn't covered in the rules. They are factually wrong but, for fun let's pretend the relevant rules don't exist in the player's code of conduct.
I find it an odd because many of those say people especially the NYT will vilify any person or business that makes money in exactly the same way. Have a Walmart legally buy up the land an orphanage happens to be on close it down, demolish the building and build a new Walmart. Well, the NYT will print op eds on how Walmart is evil and how different rules should have their interpretation stretched or government action should be brought to bear to punish Walmart. Despite Walmart doing everything technically by the book.
Not for me sorry, especially as I didn't know people including the media were straight up ignoring the rules. That's why the company speil made no sense and the typos/grammar sent me way off track. But thank you and I completely agree with what you said. lol
Both players and BWF are to be blamed
I voted for 'Both players and BWF are to be blamed'.
Many Badminton fans would know that BWF would not disqualify the 8 players for match-throwing (if played in their BWF-controlled tournaments). This is because the BWF allow players to win (regardless of how they play, whether there is match-throwing/match-fixing, or not).
However, at the Olympics, we have this participants' "The Olympic Oath", which states that;
"In the name of all competitors, I promise that we shall take part in these Olympic Games respecting and abiding by the rules that govern them, in the true spirit of sportsmanship, for the glory of sport and the honour of our teams".
BWF do not have this oath for their players, therefore "in true spirit of sportsmanship" is never mentioned.
The Badminton umpires/judges (when at the Olympic Games) are also aware of their officials' oath, which states that;
"In the name of all the judges, I promise that we shall officiate in these Olympic Games with complete impartiality respecting and abiding by the rules which govern them, in the true spirit of sportsmanship".
BWF do not have this oath for their umpires/officials, therefore the "true spirit of sportsmanship" was also never mentioned.
I wasn't surprised that Yu Yang decided to quit Badminton (after this debacle). She tried her hardest to perform at her best under the BWF's rules, but now she realised that it wasn't in the true spirit of sportsmanship", which BWF has never encouraged for our Badminton players to have.
Not Olympics oath Chris it is in fact BWF rules and it covers all you said it didn't.
4.5 not using one’s best efforts to win a match (note it does not say tournament)
4.16 conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport