Yu Yang quits badminton over disqualification

**mcdogoo** · 08-02-2012, 02:59 PM

What is with all these silly personal attacks? This happens in every sport, am I wrong???

Get off your high horses please.

She did what she thought was the best for her country, simple.

**mcdogoo** · 08-02-2012, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by nokh88

Why was she made the scapegoat (to quit)? Why not WXL? Is it because she receive first in the match instead of WXL?

That would make you very happy, wouldn't it?

**LazyBuddy** · 08-02-2012, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by SibugiChai

if olympic get booted out, many thanks to china

Maybe.

So, you can now claim you have 50 LCW, and 200 WD pairs in making, and prepare to dominate the sport for the next 100 years all you want now. Oh, btw, they will all be honest, help each other while spread out the common wealth, and give 150% on every single game, even the backyard practices.

Sure, I will try to believe that as well, as there's no "testing ground" any more.

**thunder.tw** · 08-02-2012, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by mcdogoo

This happens in every sport, am I wrong???

Yes you are wrong. It doesn't happen in every sport.

She did what she thought was the best for her country, simple.

No she cheated, simple. Now she's DQ'd. And, if you want to invoke this 'did it for her country' tripe then have a good look and how her country is thanking her.

**mindfields** · 08-02-2012, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by mcdogoo

She did what she thought was the best for her country, simple.

True,
It wasn't what was best for the sport though. In fact it was terrible for the sport.

**mcdogoo** · 08-02-2012, 03:34 PM

@ thunder.tw

Don't be native, sports and betting go hand in hand. When there is money involved, everything is murky.
Football, tennis, horse racing, snooker ... they are all clean, are they?

When you are a pawn, there is little choice, that is life.

**LazyBuddy** · 08-02-2012, 03:36 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

And, if you want to invoke this 'did it for her country' tripe then have a good look and how her country is thanking her.

That's the cruel part, and that's why I say she's facing a lose lose situation to begin with.

Because besides the 7 other ladies (and coaches), all of us fans only need to sit in a well AC room with our fancy PC and smart phones, and riding our high moral horse, and acting like internet tough guy.

I call these "political correctness". Sure, I cannot debate over it, but in reality, the talkers do not contribute to the society, but the do-ers (even though they do fail in some fashions) will or, at least tried...

**mcdogoo** · 08-02-2012, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by mindfields

True,
It wasn't what was best for the sport though. In fact it was terrible for the sport.

Actually, may not be so terrible apart from the apparent bad press. Just to be cheeky, badminton never even made international headlines. As they say, any publicity is good publicity.

On a serious note, Li Yongbo would go after the Olympics. "He is ready to to face his responsibility after the games", this is good for the sport, surely.

**thunder.tw** · 08-02-2012, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by mcdogoo

@ thunder.tw

Don't be native, sports and betting go hand in hand. When there is money involved, everything is murky.
Football, tennis, horse racing, snooker ... they are all clean, are they?

When you are a pawn, there is little choice, that is life.

Well then sport put your money where your mouth is. Tennis you say? Great please give me some examples of where this occurred in Tennis.

**thunder.tw** · 08-02-2012, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by LazyBuddy

That's the cruel part, and that's why I say she's facing a lose lose situation to begin with.

Because besides the 7 other ladies (and coaches), all of us fans only need to sit in a well AC room with our fancy PC and smart phones, and riding our high moral horse, and acting like internet tough guy.

I call these "political correctness". Sure, I cannot debate over it, but in reality, the talkers do not contribute to the society, but the do-ers (even though they do fail in some fashions) will or, at least tried...

I'm not even sure you have any kind of coherent point. From what I can guess of what you are saying I'm going to bet Ben Johnson wishes Canada was full of people like you.

**habsq** · 08-02-2012, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

Well then sport put your money where your mouth is. Tennis you say? Great please give me some examples of where this occurred in Tennis.

I spent 5 seconds on Google and I found this:
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/austrian-...2301-5-22.html

**mcdogoo** · 08-02-2012, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

Well then sport put your money where your mouth is. Tennis you say? Great please give me some examples of where this occurred in Tennis.

Please google "tennis betting scandal"

Clean sports are the exception these days if there are any.

I realize I am quite emotional, borderline hysterical today, for that, I do apologize.

**LazyBuddy** · 08-02-2012, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by thunder.tw

I'm not even sure you have any kind of coherent point. From what I can guess of what you are saying I'm going to bet Ben Johnson wishes Canada was full of people like you.

Drug policy is well written, and if you fail the actual doping test (hard evidence), then there's nothing much you can argue about.

The DQs, however are strategy (no, I do not like either), played on the gray area of the current format (round robin). Yes, it's obvious. However, in theory, for the argument sake, how you justify "how hard" and "how good" their performance suppose to be? Fine, let's not going there...

If you DQ them, you might as well DQ Bolt or Phelps, as I am pretty sure they did not win every single heat in the qualification round, before taking the gold in the final. So, they obviously did not "try hard" either.

**thunder.tw** · 08-02-2012, 05:10 PM

Originally Posted by mcdogoo

Please google "tennis betting scandal"

Clean sports are the exception these days if there are any.

I realize I am quite emotional, borderline hysterical today, for that, I do apologize.

That scandal is a tanget at best. In that case the ATP have investigated the matter to the limit of their power they are facing stiff question from inside their own organisations. The ATP didn't need the IOC to strong arm them into doing anything. If you wanted to give a Tennis parallel to this you would need Federer and Nadal each doing nothing but serving intentional double faults on center court at the French Open.

Look, what your point with respect to this thread (if I may be so bold as to drag this thing back OT). Are you saying that because Yu Yang felt pressure to throw that match that this should absolve her of all consequences for caving to that pressure?

That now I should feel sorry for her based on this outburst of melodrama on her part? The lady really believes she did nothing wrong and seems to be baffled by the concept that her actions really could have resulted in real consequences.

So yes I say she has a share of the blame and she deserves what she got. Saying this doesn't mean that she get ALL of the blame. As I've said in other threads there's blame for everyone from the players to the BWF, to the NAs and even to the fans that have excused this nonsense in the past.

**twobeer** · 08-02-2012, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by LazyBuddy

Drug policy is well written, and if you fail the actual doping test (hard evidence), then there's nothing much you can argue about.

But some Athletes seem to get around that also with loopholes about approving abnormal testvalues and steroid use etc., if they just can blame some ilness (most prefferably cancer or something that also gets sympathies) to get a "free pass" to use substances that otherwise would not have been legal.

**Jasonvan** · 08-02-2012, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by LazyBuddy

Drug policy is well written, and if you fail the actual doping test (hard evidence), then there's nothing much you can argue about.

The DQs, however are strategy (no, I do not like either), played on the gray area of the current format (round robin). Yes, it's obvious. However, in theory, for the argument sake, how you justify "how hard" and "how good" their performance suppose to be? Fine, let's not going there...

If you DQ them, you might as well DQ Bolt or Phelps, as I am pretty sure they did not win every single heat in the qualification round, before taking the gold in the final. So, they obviously did not "try hard" either.

Exactly, it was technically legal within the context of the rules at the time. Of course BWF did an immediate 180 following the bad press they got.

**thunder.tw** · 08-02-2012, 05:27 PM

Originally Posted by LazyBuddy

Drug policy is well written, and if you fail the actual doping test (hard evidence), then there's nothing much you can argue about.

Actually there is a written code about playing to your best ability.

The DQs, however are strategy (no, I do not like either)

DQs are not a strategy. If they are then they should be happy..... they got DQ'd

played on the gray area of the current format (round robin). Yes, it's obvious. However, in theory, for the argument sake, how you justify "how hard" and "how good" their performance suppose to be? Fine, let's not going there...

Always amusing to see someone 'go somewhere' then say "let's not go there". They didn't just engage in gamesmanship they made a complete fckn mockery of the game. There was no 'grey' area there was no 'murkyness'. They actually were warned and given a second chance at that point things should have been crystal clear to them.

If you DQ them, you might as well DQ Bolt or Phelps, as I am pretty sure they did not win every single heat in the qualification round, before taking the gold in the final. So, they obviously did not "try hard" either.

Ah the old make $hit up play. They qualified so it's pretty fckn hard to say they didn't try hard enough to win isn't it?? Now you might have a valid point if Bolt ran backwards.

Look you don't get it and you are incapable of understanding it. There is no defending what these ladies did. Are they alone to blame for this whole fiasco? No. But, they aren't innocent either and they sure as hell aren't victims either.