There is a small $250 fine if withdrawing within 2 weeks of the start for apparently "inconveniencing" the organizers (which I agree is questionable) but what I was mainly pointing out is they do not make injured top players play in the tournament. Which is the main focus of this thread isn't it: Chinese top players entering and withdrawing to avoid the fine because it's cheaper that way ... Of course if you have to pay the flight and stay yourself even for promotional activities when you are injured you might as well protest it in this manner. At least in tennis it's up to the tournament organization to provide stay and air fare, but then again they are working with much bigger budgets. Players need to change their mindsets if they hope for any growth. A small sacrifice now, for future gain ...
(Most) People beforehand come/watch for names, not necessarily play. If you cannot guarantee a tv station your top players are attending an event why would they pay for the broadcast right. Why do you think tennis prize money is on the rise year after year after year? Consistency in the product they offer tv stations and sponsors made possible by these attendance rules which BWF has only copied, not invented. BWF may want to review the calendar yes but players need to change their mindsets as well ...
Copying tennis' attendance rules is a recipe for disaster. As a sport, badminton is not on the same level as tennis in terms of economic backing (aka purse money). So while it MAY work for tennis, it's obviously not working for badminton. Besides which, players are usually playing not for themselves (as in the case of tennis) but are part of the group that a country sends out to compete. So a lot of times, they aren't even their own boss so to speak. Prize money going up has more to do with the branding of the product than the consistency of the product. I don't think badminton had any consistency problems in the last 8 years with the top 4 spots in MS being fairly stable (just like in tennis where the top spots in tennis have been fairly stable for the past decade or so, and golf where THE top spot was pretty stable from 1997 to 2009). If you have one megastar or a few superstars that you can package your marketing around, it's easier to sell to sponsors. Problem is, in badminton the stars don't report to themselves and they don't always call their own shots.
Of course in the end you can never dream of getting to the same level of tennis. The US Open for one get's $80 million, half of total revenue, from ticket sales and most of the other half from tv deals and sponsorships. Players speaking english, another dream too far? Even Brazilian prostitutes are learning English now. Australian Open director mentioned increased tv coverage of the tournaments preceding this year's Australian Open have led to increased ticket sales ... But getting on tv period for badminton is a task on it's own already and priority #1. Tv broadcast money though even in tennis and the majority of sports is a big pice of the pie and you cannot get tv deals without some guarantees of the stars being marketed actually showing up (and what point is there of sponsoring an event without media/tv coverage). College tennis in the US apparently changing their format as well to be more tv friendly in the hopes of a tv deal with ESPN (sound familiar ?) Everyone is criticizing but no one is coming up with a different solution. If you have attendance rules in place there is not much even the national association can say about it is another way of looking at it ... "ATP Tour players flex tired muscles and talk of strikes After initial talks involving Murray, Federer, Nadal and Roddick, players will discuss the situation at next month's Shanghai Masters Matt Scott The Guardian, Tuesday 20 September 2011 17.23 BST Andy Murray's talk of a potential strike comes with the authority of the former world No1s Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer and Andy Roddick. The four held a meeting to discuss the state of the game after a long and dispiriting US Open tournament this month, and a jaded view of the ATP Tour's schedule emerged. Murray and his peers are not mere shop stewards, but wealth creators for the sport. Theirs are the names that pull in the spectators and broadcasters' dollars, and the threat to withdraw their labour would strike fear into promoters. It is, moreover, understandable. A condition of entry to the ATP Tour is that all players must participate in the four grand slam tournaments, eight Masters events, four of the 11 ATP500 tour and the World Tennis finals at the O2 in December. Those 17 commitments mean about 20 weeks a year of competition playing time, with many more weeks of travelling, preparation and training. Nadal, for instance, has played 72 matches in the eight months of this season alone, equating to 1,784 games in competitions. But even for all that exertion – the four have won 150 career titles and generated $145m total prize money between them – sponsorship income brings in multiples of that sum. "We'll sit down, talk about it with the Association of Tennis Professionals and International Tennis Federation, see if they will come to a compromise and if not, we'll go from there," Murray told the BBC, ahead of a meeting with tour players at the Masters tournament in Shanghai next month. When asked if that might include strike action, the world No4 responded: "Yes, I think so. It's a possibility. I know from speaking to some players they're not afraid of doing that. Let's hope it doesn't come to that but I'm sure the players will consider it. "If we come up with a list of things we want changed – and everyone is in agreement, but they don't happen – then we need to have some say in what goes on in our sport At the moment, we don't." Tennis players do, however, have a bigger say in what goes on than in any other major sport than golf. They hold a 50% share of the ATP, with the other 50% held by the promoters. Nadal and Federer are, respectively, the vice-president and president of the player council, the 12-man board that feeds their views to the ATP's board. "The players should and do have a major say in how the game is run, which is one of the key reasons the ATP Tour was formed as an equal partnership between players and tournaments," said the ruling body in a statement. "The calendar has long been a topic of conversation and just last year we announced that we would be lengthening our off-season by two weeks beginning in 2012, meaning players will have seven weeks in between ATP World Tour seasons." The difficulty for the ATP is that it must balance the concerns of the big-name players with the financial requirements of their counterparts across the net. At the Shanghai Masters the winner will earn US$620,000. First-round losers will pick up only US$11,500 each. The last major alteration to the schedule came in 2009 when five-set finals were consigned to history, entry lists to the Masters events were reduced and byes were extended to the top-eight seeds. It meant a new cycle of broadcast contracts, typically of three years' duration, began at that point, reducing the flexibility for change to the tournament schedule. The next cycle begins in 2012 but there is an argument that several of the 2009 changes have reduced the return the spectators receive from their sport. Tennis faces a dilemma similar to many sports. There are a small number of sporting and financial powers whose participation drives the revenues of the entire game. But, as one insider said: "Each player will have different priorities. The world No80 is not likely to want to cut back on the number of tournaments. They want to play as much as they can."
certainly from the article, there are similarities between the tennis players and the Chinese badminton players. they want to play less. they want to play less perhaps it is too stressful/tiring, or too taxing to the body and may cause injuries. but in the end, they believe the schedule imposed by the federations is too much for them to handle. in the case of the tennis players, they want to have a meeting with the federations and hopefully they want to agree on a common ground. i think that's a good approach to achieve what they want. what i am not sure is whether China has approached the issue similarly, by trying to start a conversation with BWF, or has it already been done there were not any agreement made? in both cases, it seems that the bargaining chip in the players' side is their crowd drawing power. which translates to money through ticket sales, tv deals and sponsorship. certainly the more civilized path taken by the tennis players will garner more sympathy than the path taken by the Chinese, which most of the time get casted as the villian.
another interesting point (and sidetrack) pointed out by demolidor is the tv rights. now that BWF is very actively broadcasting badminton via youtube, how much does that affect the TV rights? i understand that youtube streaming is blocked for countries which has signed TV rights. but does that mean TV station has less incentive to broadcast badminton but instead broadcast some other more lucrative sports? "hey, look, if our viewers don't get to watch badminton through us, they can still watch it in youtube. let's forget about badminton and sign some football/tennis/golf deals instead to make us more money, eh?"
Withdrawal here and withdrawal there.......hmmmmm....why not you and me kwun just pair together and replace Fu HF/CY ( your face and me like chinese already what)
When you think about it, there hasn't actually been any "controversy" All withdrawals had to be approved by a BWF certified doctor as well as confirmed by the tournament referee and umpire yes? Therefore it is purely speculation that they've done something immoral with no definitive proof. End of the day, ultimately the BWF were happy for the players to withdraw, no matter what anyone thinks. The "controversy" has been created by people who like to read into situations.
It's really surprising that no one has brought up the point that most of the CBA players have been pretty active on the CBSL circuit the past 2-3 months... Not that I have anything against the CBSL; it's a good way of popularising the sport (in China, that is,) and allowing some of the top international players to earn some more deserved cash. In the context of the CBSL background, the withdrawals etc (if not "real" injuries etc) take on a rather ominous aspect.
i would view it as a highly statistical event - can it be a mere coincidence? Regarding CBSL, that has nothing to do with BWF so BWF cannot give allowances for player having played in a separately organised event.
My point re. the CBSL was simply this: if the players were able to generally maintain fitness all through the CBSL season and participate actively, it kind-of slaps you in the face when so many of their top, toughest and most capable players suddenly all-fall-down in synchronised chaos. Just another way of making your "mere co-incidence" point...
More like "some weird s**t is goin' on" than "controversy". Although in this case, the regular perpetrators do such thing so often it's barely "weird" anymore.
Recently, Wang Xiaoli and Yu Yang RECEIVED a walkover from Shu Cheng and Zhao Yunlei LYB is turning badminton into a joke.
Hardly. Cheng was Zhao's regular partner since her junior days before they were split to form 2 new pairs (Cheng/Lady Pan Pan and Zhao/Tian Qing).
Let's look at some good out of this. China's players dropping out on the face of it, doesn't look good. Rules are rules and BWF will probably have a review no doubt. Interestingly, this really opens up the draws. Some players get better rest periods in the tournament and non-China players, well, have a chance to go further. Back in their home countries, those non-China players will go further in the tournament securing better funding because of the results.
there was an opinion that all the 4 retirements by china team in day 1 is to let the class A players get home earlier and get in to their special training camp. but if that is really the case, what are XC/MJ and ZN/ZYL doing there in the competition till SFs? they're surely china class A players too, right?
