who's to blame for the match throwing?

**thunder.tw** · 08-05-2012, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by fanyy

Any of the BWF idiot policy makers get punished yet?

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.

***cobalt*** · 08-05-2012, 06:13 PM

I can't "like" the above post enough!

**craigandy** · 08-05-2012, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

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.
.

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.

**charedblack** · 08-05-2012, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

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.

BIG +1

So spot on!

**thunder.tw** · 08-05-2012, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by craigandy

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.

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.

**craigandy** · 08-06-2012, 07:13 AM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

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.

**thunder.tw** · 08-06-2012, 04:24 PM

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.

**craigandy** · 08-06-2012, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

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.

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

**chris-ccc** · 08-06-2012, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by kwun

who's to blame for the match throwing?

.
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.

.

**craigandy** · 08-06-2012, 08:23 PM

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

**chris-ccc** · 08-06-2012, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by craigandy

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

.
Well, BWF has never disqualified players/teams in the past when match-fixing was so obvious - When one player/pair gave walkover to teammates, and/or when one team lose to another on purpose.

We can remember how KOR manuplitated their advancement at the Thomas Cup fixture some years ago.
.

**RedShuttle** · 08-06-2012, 09:38 PM

It was hard not to punish that kind of blatant disregard to the basic concept of competing. However, it is just hypocritical for IOC, BWF and media to jump on the badminton players.

Whenever the competition is not a straight knock-out format, this kind of thing is bound to occur. It's just that round robin format is so unusual in badminton such that badminton players don't have any experience in faking the results like athletes in other sports. Faking in soccer is common, just like what the Japanese team did. But they would never score on their own goals like WD pairs were essentially doing.

It is particularly appalling that BWF took no responsibility, was not proactive (e.g. forcefully warning the teams), and did nothing to use the scandal to promote badminton with good PR spinning. This just confirms what a bunch of idiot these people are. It is really sad for badminton.

**LazyBuddy** · 08-06-2012, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by RedShuttle

It's just that round robin format is so unusual in badminton such that badminton players don't have any experience in faking the results like athletes in other sports. Faking in soccer is common, just like what the Japanese team did. But they would never score on their own goals like WD pairs were essentially doing.

The key is not "common" or "lack of practice", it's because both sides want to lose. Be it soccer, or any sports, if both sides want to lose, besides things like "own goal" or so, there's nothing better you can do. Trust me, when both want to lose, the "competition level" is even higher than both want to win.

**CantSmashThis** · 12-12-2012, 02:08 PM

Sorry to bring up this old chat, I believe the Chinese coaches were not punished in this at all?

Also, I just came back from the US Adult Trials, just a little tidbit I picked up was that Torsten Berg chose not to give the black card in that situation. He wanted it to go to the disciplinary committee where they were planning to disqualify the players anyways. The discplinary committee was to also punish the coaches in their roles as well rather than just black carding the players in the match. But like I stated, I believe no Chinese coaches got punished, am I right?

**pcll99** · 12-12-2012, 09:33 PM

Originally Posted by CantSmashThis

Sorry to bring up this old chat, I believe the Chinese coaches were not punished in this at all?

Also, I just came back from the US Adult Trials, just a little tidbit I picked up was that Torsten Berg chose not to give the black card in that situation. He wanted it to go to the disciplinary committee where they were planning to disqualify the players anyways. The discplinary committee was to also punish the coaches in their roles as well rather than just black carding the players in the match. But like I stated, I believe no Chinese coaches got punished, am I right?

i believe you are right. no Chinese coach was punished.

in fact I think LYB may get promoted soon!!! and LYB's boss may get elected president of BWF in May 2013!!!

hahaa..

**RedShuttle** · 12-12-2012, 09:52 PM

Since the act was committed with good, if misguided, intentions, even if there was punishment, it would be done quietly. KBA's throwing the coaches under the bus made no sense.

Nevertheless, there is now a new WD head coach for the Chinese team. It is not clear whether the change is related to the event at the Olympics.

What I want to know is whether any BWF official was punished for putting the sport in such a precarious position. The inaction of the head referee also directly led to the disqualification of the players in the second match.

**mikeyapkf** · 01-19-2013, 03:31 PM

The fault lies with the structure ( round robin ). Clearly the players and coach are taking advantage of this setup to get both their team in. Humans are intelligent species and how can you blame them? Just review and eliminate the round robin format as it serves no purpose. Instead of letting the players play in a pool, it would be better to have more players participate in a KO format.