Results 35 to 51 of 71
Thread: Shame on IBF
02-09-2006, 06:23 AM #35Originally Posted by seven
At one time in the 80s it was even bigger than badminton, but recently Malaysia produced its first world champion and no one watched the event on Tv because itwas never televised.
And the big players in Squash are the British and Australians !
Well perhaps it is an eg. I can think of where baddy has performed better.
02-09-2006, 07:13 AM #36
The death of a sport
i think I understand what the IBF is up to ;
In 1980s squash in Msia was big time, everyone watched Jahangir Khan
on TV and liked to play like him, squash courts were built everywhere and you had to queue to play.
Today squash has never been aired on TV , there are courts everywhere but no one wants to play as they have no TV exposure, no one sells racquets etc.Few know how to play the game.
Then there is Table Tennis, youngsters refrain from playing the game, they
dont want to be associated with the scrawny bespectacled nerds seen on Tv, until it is no longer seen on Tv.
Youngsters shy away from the two, they rather be like the glamorous Beckham they see on TV or Michael Jordan or Tiger Wood s or Michelle Wie.
It's got a lot to do with commrecilisation just as in pop music.
02-09-2006, 07:56 AM #37Originally Posted by Bbn
* doesn't have the same history as badminton
* has never been popular worldwide
* has not developped via "associative" federations but via private clubs
* (therefore?) is more expensive to play at (=> reserved to an "elite")
* is repetitive and uninteresting on TV (except for specialists)
* has never been olympic
So can we really compare? (and finding one worse example wouldn't prove much anyway... )
02-09-2006, 07:19 PM #38Originally Posted by seven
02-09-2006, 07:45 PM #39Originally Posted by I may disappoint you but I am [b
Maybe, we can do something better by actually helping the IBF. For a start, why don't we start drafting the laws of badminton in all the languages of the world instead of in English? Don't you agree that to be really international the laws of badminton must also go international?
There is a world of difference in the two perspectives-one from a small corner on the ground and the other from a 'helicopter' point of view. Now you don't want the two to swap places, do you?
02-09-2006, 07:54 PM #40Originally Posted by seven
02-09-2006, 08:03 PM #41Originally Posted by seven
Please see and put things in proper perspective.
02-09-2006, 08:13 PM #42Originally Posted by taneepak
Many players in Asia and other less developed countries such as Africa may not be 'registered players' by IBF definition. Many continue to play badminton for the love of it. Their badminton setups and facilities may not be as well-structured and established as those in the West. In fact, many are still backward by Western standards.
The truth is I'm not even a registered player and I've been involved in this game since young. Just imagine how many more are like me or even in a worse situation than me. Despite being an active IBF member for so many decades, Singapore still doesn't have a professional leaque.
So is 'registered players' a good and fair gauge? If it is not, then the current voting system is flawed! And to eliminate all these unfair measurements, a "one country one vote system" should replace the current one.
Last edited by Loh; 02-09-2006 at 08:18 PM.
02-10-2006, 03:25 AM #43Originally Posted by taneepak
It is too easy to cheat on the total number of players, and anyway there is no precise way of counting it!
02-10-2006, 03:27 AM #44Originally Posted by taneepak
02-10-2006, 03:31 AM #45Originally Posted by taneepak
If badminton is more popular than ever before (which it is in France), there is no reason to change the scoring system.
Originally Posted by taneepak
Spending lots of money and energy on changing a scoring system which works perfectly well, instead of addressing the real problems is a real prooth of blindness and incompetence.
02-10-2006, 05:16 AM #46
I said the IBF has gone forward and improved the world standing of badminton because of what I have seen over the last three or more years that I have been a member of this Forum.
Perhaps the watershed year was 1992 when badminton first made its appearance at the Olympics. This was more than ten years ago, but what has the IBF done before that year? Someone should research into this and also find out who and from which country the IBF Council was comprised of in 1992. This committee should be congratulated for their hard work in publicizing badminton to the world on TV. For that was perhaps the first time that the world really got to see what an explosive game badminton was and still is. As the Olympics comes about only every 4 years, badminton has appeared only 4 times so far. Isn't this a pity when we know that the IBF was founded in 1934 and its pioneer members were all from the West. It took 58 years for badminton to be recognized by the Olympics!
During the last few years, more of IBF grand prix events were televised and brought to the reaches of many more countries. Now, the IBF has even engaged a professional company to help them in this regard. I'm sure we will see positive results from this tie-up.
But, I consider by far the most significant contribution by the past and present IBF Council is the setting up of the three International Training Centres to benefit young talents from the 'less-badminton-developed' countries, even from countries we hardly heard of not too long ago. What it means is that countries hitherto never counted as far as badminton goes, are now roped into the extended IBF family. The IBF must have enlarged its active membership during the last few years. And even the Olympic Council has recognized and approved two of these training centres for scholarship purposes.
In Punch Gunalan's recent open letter to badminton fans, he has set out IBF Council's goals, action plans and the reasons for certain decisions, including the 21-point scoring system. Council members need to have a 'helicopter view' of things and a forward-looking vision to ensure that badminton keeps on improving and making its mark in international sports. They have other interested members to help them in the nitty-gritties. We should support their plans and give them positive feedback. We should also let them know when they have done a good job.
Whether they wiil succeed in their goals is left to be seen. But reasonable time must be given to implement their plans. The fact that they are willing to discuss and make their plans transparent is already a great departure from the old IBF practice.
As I've said, if someone could do some research, make comparisions, measure what the 'new' IBF has done against the 'old' IBF (say before 1992), then will we be able to truly say they should be condemned or otherwise. But general accusations like 'incompetent', worse still, 'corrupt' (for it can lend oneself to a lawsuit) without evidence, only makes matter worse. It doesn't help the current IBF Council in its work to project itself in the sports world, neither does it help world badminton.
02-10-2006, 05:31 AM #47Originally Posted by Loh
(I wasn't trying to help IBF on that one, though recognizing these facts would maybe help actually )
Saying that IBF is not up to it doesn't please me, doesn't please you, doesn't please any badminton fan, it is just a simple and unfortunate observation.
Obviously and luckily they have done many good and positive moves over the years.
But quite a few decisions (or lack of) are disastrous and the worst of all is the constant messing about with the scoring system.
The way things are done is really not serious, completely opaque and amateur-like I must say, and it ruins badminton's image...
02-10-2006, 05:43 AM #48Originally Posted by seven
02-10-2006, 05:55 AM #49Originally Posted by taneepak
You are perfectly entitled to support the rally scoring system if you really think it is a major need for badminton.
But until now I haven't read many arguments, which is the only thing I can be interested in.
I have seen you post lots of "wait and see it's only a trial." "try it and you'll see it's good" etc but not many arguments.
The only real list of arguments that I read was from Punch Gunalan and I must admit they really weren't convincing!
(more like a "panic list" after seeing how badly his scoring system is perceived by fans).
02-10-2006, 06:01 AM #50Originally Posted by Loh
Good idea abt the rtesearch. In fact we should go back to 1988
when it was a demo sport in Korea and Yang Yang won the first gold medal.
Or even as far back as 1982 when IBF merged with WBF and China was allowed to participate.It was also abt the time when squash hit peak.
I think the scoring system is mainly to siut TV broadcasters and audiences with limited budgets.
I have heard rumours that for the very first time no one may want to sponsor the thomas Cup finals or World Champs if nothing is done to the scoring system.
02-10-2006, 07:13 AM #51
Seven, please remember it requires 2/3 of the total votes to get the new scoring system passed, a near impossible threshhold. But should it be passed by the 2/3 majority, then the IBF Council is not half the idiot you repeatedly broadcast to the world. Also France has the maximum 5 votes. You should talk to them before they cast their votes the wrong side. What if France votes for the new system? Would you give up badminton?
By crazy_smasher in forum All England 2004Replies: 2: 03-15-2004, 05:31 AM
By willie in forum General ForumReplies: 11: 10-28-2002, 12:09 PM
By ALI in forum Thomas/Uber Cup 2002Replies: 7: 05-17-2002, 05:57 AM
By hm... in forum 2001 Sudirman Cup / World ChampionshipsReplies: 12: 06-01-2001, 08:54 PM