The resignation is technically not finalised . Agree; that Misbun's resignation is technically not finalised yet. But look at it this way; If Misbun is not happy to work for BAM anymore, and has submitted a resignation, it is inevitable that BAM has to allow him to go. .
I believe I read somewhere that his contract was up on December 31, the same day he emailed his resignation. In that case, it does not matter if they "accept" or "reject" because the contract is already over. It is up to him to decide if he wishes to renew the contract, if at all.
I believe all contracts for the coaches expired on Dec. 31, 2010 and new renewal contracts have yet to be received by the coaches. Therefore MS cannot resign on an expired contract. Maybe, what he meant was intended as a notice to BAM that he would no longer be interested in renewing the contract. BTW, Misbun also has a contract as a coach with the NSC besides the one with BAM and both contracts expired Dec. 31, 2010. Only BAM received that strange 'resignation' letter but not NSC.
A notice to BAM that Misbun would no longer be interested in renewing his contract . You have got it; It is a notice to BAM that Misbun would no longer be interested in renewing his contract. .
The point is... Contract is expired but BAM was expecting everyone to show up on Jan 01 2011. MS on the other hand does not. Ball is in BAM's court. Smash, drop shot or rally? Their call.
Just curious, if the contract expired on Dec 31st, 2010, why didn't they (BAM and Misbun) renew or negotiate months ahead? Ya, may be they did...
Yes, but why no to one (BAM) and ostensibly yes to the other (NSC)? This is not consistent. Also why two contracts from two organizations for the same thing for MS?
Why two contracts from two organizations for the same thing for Misbun? . I don't really know. My guess: To get Misbun to write more reports; different reports about the same thing to separate organisations. .
If a person has lost interest in his job, the natural thing to do is to let him go . Just found this article; http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/18badd-2/Article/ And I agree with what the 2 paragraphs said; "I'm wondering what is it about the Badminton Association of Malaysia (BAM) that it is so reluctant to accept the resignation of Datuk Misbun Sidek as the singles coach? If a person has lost interest in his job, the natural thing to do is to let him go. In the case of Misbun, it is obvious that he is sulking for reasons best known to himself. To continue to have someone in this frame of mind will not benefit the country." .
The author is right but wrong He is right when he says misbun should go if he lost interest in coaching as it wouldn't benefit the country. But does he know about why he quit? No, because no one mention what he wrote to bam in his 5 pages email So if he don't know the reason why then he shouldn't say things like that
"f-a-u-l-t" = for all u lousy touts . It takes Loh to suddenly come in with this "F-A-U-L-T". However, who are the "lousy touts"? .
Could the NSC contract be dependant or tied to, in some way to the BAM contract? After all, his main work would be in BAM, not NSC... And if he has given notice that he will not renew the contract with BAM, it might be logical that there would be no need for renewal of any contract with NSC. Just wondering...
It's never gonna to be Badminton as a sports when politics is involved . To me, NSC is just overlooking BAM. IMHO, it's never gonna to be Badminton as a sports when politics is playing a more important role. .