User Tag List

Page 15 of 24 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 LastLast
Results 239 to 255 of 392
  1. #239
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,475
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy View Post
    I kinda want to suggest the exact opposite, there should be no limitation per country, simply select the best of the best players, regardless which flag s/he carries. We are talking about a sports event, there should be no politics involved.

    Why there's so call walk-over, team stategy, etc? Because that's exactly how CHN and its players to counter the 3 per nation policy. If there's no limit, then all the players only need to fight for him/herself, but not too worry about, whether "I am only the 4th best of my nation". If there's no limit, players obviously will fight for his/her own ranking points, and for the possible higher seed. How well his/her teammate will do, will be much much much less important.

    Because of the 3 per nation policy, you always harshly took away players' chance, such as XXZ (2004), XXF (2004), CY (at least 2004 and 2008), and now, BCL, WL, and many others will join the list for 2012. You tell me all such ppl (including WC champion and runner up) should be left out, simply because other rank 100+ players born in another nation?

    Sure, walk over may give a blow to the sport image or excitement. Then what about kick out the WC champion and runner up, to make spot and please rank 100+ participant do any good????
    based on the current ranking points, Fabien Kaddour of NCL at 231 is likely to be qualified for the MS for London 2012, even if he is going to drop a few places in the next few months.

  2. #240
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by renbo View Post
    Yes, that I think is the most effective way. But people must BOO very strongly. I heard in Singapour the public was really upset and showed it. If similar reactions happens again and again, teams and players will think twice before misbehaving.
    If china dare to do that in Malaysia, we will give them hell. Imagine a few thousands fans give them thumb down and ask them to get lost.

  3. #241
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,770
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow BadmintonCentral is independent of BWF and National Associations

    Quote Originally Posted by viver View Post
    I don't understand why you have to worry about somebody's errors. If the National experts select their representatives based on biased criteria rather than competence, it's their decision and problem.
    .
    BadmintonCentral is independent of BWF and National Associations.

    Currently, BCers are interested to voice our opinions about what is going wrong with Badminton (through BC). We are saying that BWF and some National Associations are doing harm to our sport, therefore we criticise them.

    As far as I know, BWF and some National Associations are reading our threads. Let them think over about what we have posted.

    I am not worried about how National experts select their representatives based on biased criteria rather than competence, for I can stop following Badminton when things are not going fair to some participants involved in BWF's tournaments.

    Regarding CHN-vs-CHN players, I can just follow China's League matches. Why? Because China's League matches are 'true' matches. It's only when CHN players come out to participate in other nations' Open events that China players are involved in 'match-fixing'.

    Actually, I have spoken out enough in this thread. I shall make no more comments in this thread.
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 10-13-2011 at 10:45 AM.

  4. #242
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,475
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    talking about walkover/withdrawn, have a look of the Dutch open which is on at the moment.
    yesterday Day 1, 6 walkovers plus 1 injured/withdrawn.
    today Day 2, 5 walkovers already and we are not even into the evening matches yet!

    what i'm going to say is if people don't wanted to play for whatever reasons, it's no point to force them. either with sticks or carrots
    Last edited by AlanY; 10-13-2011 at 12:06 PM.

  5. #243
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,724
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy View Post
    Let me try to answer why...

    Say, your family has 4 kids, all hard working, all smart, all dreamed about going to the best college in the town. Then, you have troubled kids around like me, never study, creating trouble, cut classes, etc. Maybe we are lucky to simply stay out of jail, never dream about any advanced education.

    Now, time for HS graduation. Hey, there's the wonderful "2 per family" or "3 per family" rule. You are crying, while watching your brothers and sisters, and crooks like me going to college. You wonder why A+ student like you (3rd or 4th best of the school, only beatn by your OWN bro and sis) got left out, while barely F+ ppl like me can go to the SAME school, simply to waste more time from everyone.

    So, tell me how you feel if such happens? Please do not tell me "that's an insult", "that will never happened"... It did, numerous times. Ask XXZ and XXF in OG2004, CY for any OG, and probably BCL and WL in OG2012, they will tell you how nice being the "3rd or 4th best of the family" feels...
    OG qualifying procedures are slight OT for this thread, but relevant in a round-about way!

    OG qualifying procedures are set up on some common sense and practicality allied with the objective of fulfilling certain fundamental objectives. One of the primary objectives is to provide every country in the world the opportunity to participate in every event.

    The "common sense" part applies where there needs to be a cutoff for the number of entries/participants. If you allow all the designated players of an event from every country to participate, the Games will never end! And therefore, they have set up a limit for the number of participants from each country. However, to ensure that the best (and most deserving) players from the best countries get their fair share of representation, the main criteria used is the BWF ranking system. This is also to eventually ensure the highest possible quality of performance in the event (in alignment with Olympic goals.)

    Every sport has its own benchmark or method for assessing the minimum qualification criteria. In high jumps, it may be a minimum clearance required. In sprints, it may be a minimum time required. In badminton, it may be an international ranking system. But always, the qualificfation criteria is subsumed under the wider objectives/goals of the Games.

  6. #244
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,475
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cobalt View Post
    OG qualifying procedures are slight OT for this thread, but relevant in a round-about way!

    OG qualifying procedures are set up on some common sense and practicality allied with the objective of fulfilling certain fundamental objectives. One of the primary objectives is to provide every country in the world the opportunity to participate in every event.
    by allowing only 16 pairs in doubles certainly tried to achieve the opposite

    Quote Originally Posted by cobalt View Post

    Every sport has its own benchmark or method for assessing the minimum qualification criteria. In high jumps, it may be a minimum clearance required. In sprints, it may be a minimum time required. In badminton, it may be an international ranking system. But always, the qualificfation criteria is subsumed under the wider objectives/goals of the Games.
    in singles the min requirement for some is as long as you're not born in Asia or Europe, don't even need a world ranking.

  7. #245
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,724
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanY View Post
    by allowing only 16 pairs in doubles certainly tried to achieve the opposite
    I'm not trying to be an apologist for the OG way of doing things. They obviously have their own reasons, restrictions, requirements etc. Also remember, they need to use any particular venue for more than one discipline, over the duration of the Games. Logistics will have a say in defining priorities as well.

    in singles the min requirement for some is as long as you're not born in Asia or Europe, don't even need a world ranking.
    Which is why I wrote: "But always, the qualificfation criteria is subsumed under the wider objectives/goals of the Games."

    Look, I understand that it is the OG qualification process that acts as the main spur (allegedly ) for all the walkovers/withdrawals, but I need to stress: it could happen even during non-OG-qualification periods, just because people know (at the moment) there is nothing to stop them from taking advantage of the situation! I keep trying to come back to this.

    I also stress: it could be anyone, not just China!

    I also stress: one person's wrongs in the past does not justify another person's wrongs in the present, or a third person's in the future. Eventually, we are all individually accountable for our actions.

    This is why I feel the main thrust of our energy still needs to be directed at the rule-book; procedures; firewalls; and action/consequence scenarios.

  8. #246
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by victory View Post
    In JO, LD was drawn to meet CL in semi final. Every player is subject to drawing before the match. So there is nothing to complain about. Nothing unfair.

    It is not fairness in your context that we are talking about here. It is not easier or harder route to victory we are talking about here. We are talking about walk over or fake matches that is seem getting out of control now. Essentially, we are talking about professionalism and sportsmanship at the core of the events. Essentially, we are talking about get rid of constant cheating in badminton.

    In the example you have mentioned, in the spirit of sportsmanship and professionalism, in JO LD and CL must play and the winner will take on LCW.In the final, may the best man win. No argument. Nothing unfair.

    In contrast, LD gave way to CL is unfair to LCW. That is cheating and manipulation.
    What I was trying to say is, every player should only worry about him/herself, instead of what other's been through. Whether others have an easier draw, harder draw, WO in earlier round (legit or fixing), it's other ppl's problem. The player should do his/her best, regardless whether how "lucky" the opponents are, or how much energy he/she used (or did not used) in previous round.

    Even if CL and LD had a hard competition in SF, either of them still have good chance to take down LCW in final, based on their performance through out the tournament. I am simply sick and tired to read that each time CHN gain a title, there are immediately negative comments flying out.

  9. #247
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cobalt View Post
    OG qualifying procedures are slight OT for this thread, but relevant in a round-about way!

    OG qualifying procedures are set up on some common sense and practicality allied with the objective of fulfilling certain fundamental objectives. One of the primary objectives is to provide every country in the world the opportunity to participate in every event.

    The "common sense" part applies where there needs to be a cutoff for the number of entries/participants. If you allow all the designated players of an event from every country to participate, the Games will never end! And therefore, they have set up a limit for the number of participants from each country. However, to ensure that the best (and most deserving) players from the best countries get their fair share of representation, the main criteria used is the BWF ranking system. This is also to eventually ensure the highest possible quality of performance in the event (in alignment with Olympic goals.)

    Every sport has its own benchmark or method for assessing the minimum qualification criteria. In high jumps, it may be a minimum clearance required. In sprints, it may be a minimum time required. In badminton, it may be an international ranking system. But always, the qualificfation criteria is subsumed under the wider objectives/goals of the Games.
    1. Fair share? Where's the fair share of XXZ, XXF and CY? Last time I check, OG spirit is NOT common wealth.

    2. So, now you say badminton is a team sport now, because of the nation base. I thought your guys keep crying to "individual"...

    3. Highest quality??? Are you kidding me? Leave out the definding WC champion and runner up, replace with rank 100 - 200+ players give you the "highest quality"???

    4. Why the game will never end? Just select the top 32 players, whether they carry 32 different flags, or all under one. Therefore, you see all the players will fight to death for him/herself. LD will never have to worry whether "my good performance will hurt my lil bro in CJ and CL" any more...

  10. #248
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raymond View Post
    Uhh... Was 9:00 p.m. already too late for you, or 10:00 p.m. too late for me.

    Somehow, I couldn't connect your comments with your quote of what I said earlier. Are you saying that if there's no limit per nation, then perhaps in early rounds most other flags would be eliminated, and thus there's no need for any match-fixing? Is that what I'm hearing?
    I was trying to say, if there's no limitation, then LD do not have to worry about CJ, CL, etc to have enough ranking points or not to crack into top 4. Many top players will not have to be left out, simply they are only the "3rd best" or "4th best" of their own team. As long as they are in the top 32, they will have almost equal chance to take a shot at the OG gold.

  11. #249
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,752
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am quite aware that BC is a place where people can voice their opinions. We have seen this happening and it's healthy.

    Your comments confuse me, I am unable to figure out your opinion :

    "Having only 1 participant per country can still be corrupted (National Associations may select the wrong one due to some wrong decisions)."

    "I am not worried about how National experts select their representatives based on biased criteria rather than competence, for I can stop following Badminton when things are not going fair to some participants involved in BWF's tournaments."

    "...China players are involved in 'match-fixing'. ..."
    Actually, if you have NOT spoken out enough yet, let's continue with the China-bashing...


    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post
    .
    BadmintonCentral is independent of BWF and National Associations.

    Currently, BCers are interested to voice our opinions about what is going wrong with Badminton (through BC). We are saying that BWF and some National Associations are doing harm to our sport, therefore we criticise them.

    As far as I know, BWF and some National Associations are reading our threads. Let them think over about what we have posted.

    I am not worried about how National experts select their representatives based on biased criteria rather than competence, for I can stop following Badminton when things are not going fair to some participants involved in BWF's tournaments.

    Regarding CHN-vs-CHN players, I can just follow China's League matches. Why? Because China's League matches are 'true' matches. It's only when CHN players come out to participate in other nations' Open events that China players are involved in 'match-fixing'.

    Actually, I have spoken out enough in this thread. I shall make no more comments in this thread.
    .

  12. #250
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,724
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy View Post
    1. Fair share? Where's the fair share of XXZ, XXF and CY? Last time I check, OG spirit is NOT common wealth.
    We can go at this endlessly, and it will not benefit anyone. Please check my post: I said "common sense" not "common wealth." OG tries to give representation to as many countries as possible under the circumstances. OG is devised to be games for nations, and not individuals. This direct dichotomy with the way SS and SSP and GPG etc is designed to work, is the reason for all the problems we are discussing.
    2. So, now you say badminton is a team sport now, because of the nation base. I thought your guys keep crying to "individual"...
    Check. Badminton is a team sport played by nation against nation when it comes to OG, AG, CWG, TC, SC ad infititum, ad nauseum. We just have to accept that fact and move on from there. I don't like it any more than you do, truly. That is why we need to look for answers elsewhere. Which is what we are trying to do here...
    3. Highest quality??? Are you kidding me? Leave out the definding WC champion and runner up, replace with rank 100 - 200+ players give you the "highest quality"???
    Read the entire sentence, and in context of the entire paragraph. The problems arise when people take words and half-sentences out of context and give a different meaning to what is said. I suggest you re-read my post. SLOWLY. COMPLETELY. And then, go through some of the posts made on this thread, in the earlier pages as well. BTW, I assume you mean CJ as "defending WC champion." So, what about WL, then? Should we start banging the table about her right to participate even if she can't bend her knee? You see, what BWF and OG committee are saying is, "You gotta earn the right within the framework of rules established."
    4. Why the game will never end? Just select the top 32 players, whether they carry 32 different flags, or all under one. Therefore, you see all the players will fight to death for him/herself. LD will never have to worry whether "my good performance will hurt my lil bro in CJ and CL" any more...
    Nope, can't do that! That is like a SS finals or a WC. OG wants wider representation, reaching out to more diverse audiences, popularising the sports worldwide using the OG, promoting harmony and togetherness and all that. People in Peru don't really care about Lin Dan or Taufik or XXF or Minatsu, but if one of their countrymen were playing badminton at the OG, you can bet your sweet patootie they'd be watching their man on television. If he made it to the round of 32 or whatever, he'd be a national hero. Or heroine.

    I'm going to borrow a quote from Anna Rice here because I believe it is very relevant. Of course, that depends on your value of the individual, and of human endeavour.
    I take the issue of match fixing in our sport very seriously. To me it is as much a form of cheating as is doping. Not only does it cast a light of illegitimacy on our entire sport (and everyone involved with it), it also takes away the right of players to pursue their own destiny.

  13. #251
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,724
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy View Post
    What I was trying to say is, every player should only worry about him/herself, instead of what other's been through. Whether others have an easier draw, harder draw, WO in earlier round (legit or fixing), it's other ppl's problem. The player should do his/her best, regardless whether how "lucky" the opponents are, or how much energy he/she used (or did not used) in previous round.

    Even if CL and LD had a hard competition in SF, either of them still have good chance to take down LCW in final, based on their performance through out the tournament. I am simply sick and tired to read that each time CHN gain a title, there are immediately negative comments flying out.
    Buddy, you just blew it right there.... what did you think this thread was about???

  14. #252
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,752
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I do not have any problem with Anna Rice's comment. I do believe in freedom and individual auto-determination when our decisions.

    I am also more aware today that pluralism is present in our complex world, where the 'universal' value(s) change with the geographical location. Some societies value individualism while others place group goals at a higher level. How we decide which is higher when we are not in their shoes? As an aside, I grew up in Asia, and I had my first job, my mother told me that I was responsible to support the family. I gave her my salary, saving some pocket money for my badminton expenses. Today I said the same thing to my son and the reply was 'Good try dad!'. Values...

    For discussion sake, I know you have mentioned many times the issues with the Olympics qualifications and others as well. Going back to Anna's statement 'the right of players to pursue their own destiny' - by restricting the number of players per country (in tournaments), is already taking away the right of players to pursue their destiny. Aren't we already contradicting ourselves?


    Quote Originally Posted by cobalt View Post
    ...
    I'm going to borrow a quote from Anna Rice here because I believe it is very relevant. Of course, that depends on your value of the individual, and of human endeavour.
    I take the issue of match fixing in our sport very seriously. To me it is as much a form of cheating as is doping. Not only does it cast a light of illegitimacy on our entire sport (and everyone involved with it), it also takes away the right of players to pursue their own destiny.

  15. #253
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Kuala Lumpur
    Posts
    487
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy View Post
    What I was trying to say is, every player should only worry about him/herself, instead of what other's been through. Whether others have an easier draw, harder draw, WO in earlier round (legit or fixing), it's other ppl's problem. The player should do his/her best, regardless whether how "lucky" the opponents are, or how much energy he/she used (or did not used) in previous round.Even if CL and LD had a hard competition in SF, either of them still have good chance to take down LCW in final, based on their performance through out the tournament. I am simply sick and tired to read that each time CHN gain a title, there are immediately negative comments flying out.
    You got it all over here. We do not create this thread to make a fuss out of the chinese team take another title. We are just too sick and tired to see the chinese team consistently giving WO and staging fake matches. We are here to voice our discontent and critics. After all we fans PAID to see good sports. We don't pay to see cheatings and manipulations. We want to see good sportmanship.I don't argue on behalf of LCW. LCW case in JO is just an example. It can be any player. In fact you were the one that brought up this example. So your point on every player should play his best irrelevant of others advantage is not relevan t to our discussion at all.In essence, we are talking about stopping the chinese manipulations and right enforcement. If the chinese team do not do these manipulations, this thread would not have been created at the first place.

  16. #254
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,724
    Mentioned
    41 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by viver View Post
    I do not have any problem with Anna Rice's comment. I do believe in freedom and individual auto-determination when our decisions.

    I am also more aware today that pluralism is present in our complex world, where the 'universal' value(s) change with the geographical location. Some societies value individualism while others place group goals at a higher level. How we decide which is higher when we are not in their shoes? As an aside, I grew up in Asia, and I had my first job, my mother told me that I was responsible to support the family. I gave her my salary, saving some pocket money for my badminton expenses. Today I said the same thing to my son and the reply was 'Good try dad!'. Values...

    For discussion sake, I know you have mentioned many times the issues with the Olympics qualifications and others as well. Going back to Anna's statement 'the right of players to pursue their own destiny' - by restricting the number of players per country (in tournaments), is already taking away the right of players to pursue their destiny. Aren't we already contradicting ourselves?
    I agree wholeheartedly with almost everything you have said. From a purist's point of view....
    However, this world is a "work in progress." as Buzz Perry may have confided to Butch Haynes. Or the other way around.

    I also believe there are many culture-based values, and there are also some universal values that are supposed to bond human beings regardless of culture or backgrond, individuals or groups. But all that is I suspect, for another discussion.

    But I'd just like to point out that in the context of "right to pursue one's destiny" wrt to the OG, where should one propose to draw the line? At the first 500 players in the world? The first 1000? 5000? How fair is fair? Does "understanding and acceptance" extend to accomodating the demands of the top 20 most powerful countries in the world? 25? 40? 50? With so many forces and conditions, restrictions and considerations, the OG organisers have to always work within the constructs of what is possible and plausible, what is controllable and do-able. Such a framework will always displease someone, sometime, and those who want to find fault will always be able to do so, just as those who wish to manipulate it will always do so, as well (sorry, but it needs to be said.) Under the circumstances, the Oly committee has done a great job - they've had over 100 years of bitching and fighting to fine-tune their act!

    As for our discussion, I would like to point you to post #245, right up there on this very page...

  17. #255
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    3,321
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanY View Post
    talking about walkover/withdrawn, have a look of the Dutch open which is on at the moment.yesterday Day 1, 6 walkovers plus 1 injured/withdrawn.today Day 2, 5 walkovers already and we are not even into the evening matches yet!what i'm going to say is if people don't wanted to play for whatever reasons, it's no point to force them. either with sticks or carrots
    Hmmmn....CHN bug catching? That s the way!

Page 15 of 24 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Walkover Issue
    By twobeer in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 22
    : 12-06-2011, 03:32 PM
  2. Replies: 79
    : 07-29-2011, 07:44 PM
  3. Lin Dan walkover in MO
    By xymaerts in forum Malaysia Open / Korea Open 2011
    Replies: 368
    : 01-30-2011, 10:46 PM
  4. Replies: 17
    : 09-03-2010, 10:13 AM
  5. Rights of pictures on BC
    By Johansen in forum General Forum
    Replies: 2
    : 11-16-2004, 05:08 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •