Ah, I notice that you're also into the carefully culled response! How interesting! Well, you're reallllllly stretching the imagination here, I'd say. BTW, you had the b***s to make a direct accusation on an open forum. Why don't you have the b***s to explain how it stands up to my clear response in context of your accusation? I'm still waiting for your response on the following:
???????????????? Yeah, right. Once you`ve managed to untangle yourself from your own web, give me a call...
***Phone Ring*** The number you're calling is unavailable at the moment..... Please try again later... ***...*** LOL, Be careful bro, your blood pressure will increase! We still need you here...
I just made a coffee and it's still piping hot. Yeah..it's one sided. Two against one or one against two, depends on how you look at it. Like in a doubles match of badminton.
But then again, that is my take. Feel free to disagree. But I do feel that: If the might of China and resourcefulness of their committees is insufficient to support the CBA, who has to rely upon Lin Dan's sponsorship money for survival, (as you seem to offer in your earlier post: "Suffice it to say that a huge source, if not most, of CBA's funding comes from LD's sponsorship income.")... then we're definitely not talking about the same China.[/QUOTE] Don't you assume extrapolations yourself?
This is the argument I used to say your a bullying your way through. Not because your are contesting figures, which I agree (that is the meaning of my secong post, nothing confused in that). Here what you debate is not about facts with or without reliable sources, but on what you think should be the relation between LD and his association. On that, you have no more right then others.
Don't you assume extrapolations yourself?[/QUOTE] Remember, all arguments go back to the first post by pcll99 in this chapter. So, you're actually suggesting that the Chinese Government has gone hat in hand to Lin Dan for some cash?
Please continue, I have always been sad that the thread of Lin Dan was only 300 pages long while that of LCW was double that.
Does the "government" deals with the founding of the CHN team? Which part of "government"? In many countries the budget of associations are decided automatically by the number of the association's members. In some other cases, a general budget is given to "sports", and then the money is attributed to associations based on the precedent year's result. Inother cases, as in the French football association, the budget is given by private clubs. In the case of the CBA budget, I would be gratefull if you would inform me on its working, and the nature of its financial relation to CHN team. That would be very interesting.
Rather than get distracted, it should be suffice to say it's difficult to imagine one athlete propping the majority of an association's funding. Also, the association existed before the said athlete became famous so there must be some alternate funding sources. I think we can leave it there.
Again, remember that all arguments obtain from the first post by pcll99 in this chapter. Which I notice, you have been carefully avoiding. And now, you have taken to deflecting the main thrust of the "argument". You know what you've taken to doing? Cherry-picking. What you have quoted from my post was in full response to pcll99's statement: "But my point was simply this. LD has been contributing a lot of money to CBA, and that contribution may be enough to cover the recurring expenses of CBA." The tone of that text was to somehow substantiate the message (as was his first post on this subject) that LD was in large part responsible for the continuance of the CBA. To your ludicrous assertion: ..."Here what you debate is not about facts with or without reliable sources, but on what you think should be the relation between LD and his association." Fact: Lin Dan is an athlete. Fact: He made his way up in the athlete's hierarchy in China playing badminton. Fact: He is part of the Chinese badminton team. Fact: He is a member of the association. Fact: He gets paid for the work he does, plus (possibly) bonuses. Someone even published his annual earnings sometime back on this forum. Fact: He is used (and gets paid) as an endorsement star for companies, products, services and whatever else because he became famous, doing what exactly? PLAYING BADMINTON. For who? CHINA. How? BY BEING PART OF THE FREAKIN' CBA! This is nothing to do with what I think. But, what the hell were you thinking? Again, remember that all arguments obtain from the first post by pcll99 in this chapter. Which I notice, you have been carefully avoiding. I want to see how long you intend to keep me waiting.
Yes, sorry, I use "Chinese government" in a loose manner. Most national associations are run under the aegis of the ministry of sports or whatever. I confess I don't know exactly how that works in China, but there are clear connections between some layers/sections of government and the national association. Some members here would be more conversant than me, I'm sure. Why don't you tell me what you know about how the CBA works, then?
