Tafikin??? Abisin yes... Whenever it is game point or match point, INA fans usually shout “Abisin” unbashfully which means Finish it! Finish it! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, maybe your company is a family business and your position allows you to do that. Anyway, that's beside the point. Pardon me for saying this, methinks you are making a mountain out of a molehill. There are tournaments rules and there is the umpire to do the job of overseeing the game and other related matters. What's more, in my opinion, IR's behaviour is little or no different from what most, if not all, players have or would've done within the rulebook. Like you, I also value fair play and integrity,we all should, but as IR did not break any rules( except for being warned once for stalling) unless you think the umpire did not do his job properly, I fail to see why there is even an ethical issue here.
Yeah if only this match had half the same intensity and/or the same duration and/or the same prestige and rewards
Well that's my point ... just like the match did not have the same intensity ... the delaying tactics were nooo wheeerrrrrrre near either.
That is false. Nobody even remotely changes the shuttle quite as often as her. Examples: RI against AY at the SSP 23 times (AY:0), in the semi final of Malaysia 18 (AY:0) and against TTY 17 times (TTY:3) So the number 1 and 2 in the world change the shuttle 3 times over nine games and RI 57 times. We all remember how RI was little more than cannon fodder for the big guns for a lot of 2017. Even Steen Pedersen commented that while her technique was still among the best in the world, her playing level simply wasn't high enough. A lot of that was - correctly - attributed to her subpar fitness levels. To get back to winning ways, she did two things: a) work on her fitness levels b) break up play whenever possible For the first point, she deserves a lot of credit; it is very noticeble from even, say, half a year ago. Remember how she easily won the first game against CYF at the WC but had nothing left in the tank from the middle of the second game? Now she wins 3 game thrillers against TTY and AY. Very commendable. Abiding to the rules does not automatically equate ethical behaviour. There's an unbelievable amount of things that are "allowed" or "by the rules" on this planet that no half decent human being would consider ethical. Players (humans in general) will always find a way to bend the rules (I say "bend" because I don't think changing the shuttle was ever meant as a pause, certainly not 20 times a game) in order to gain an advantage. Only when the rules are bent hard and long enough by a sufficient number of people, rule change will be introduced. More difficult if it's done by some of the most well-known representatives of what's essentially a business. Until then, it remains a matter of opinion. I personally think fitness should be a significant part of the game and that RI has been using things like shuttle change to circumvent not being in the shape others work very hard to get to. As a result, I find her games sometimes hard to watch. There are great rallys and great skills on display, but all in all her games for me often feel disjointed and extremely error-ridden (from her opponents, which is of course the point). As @nilesh123 has pointed out, the intensity is much lower for me than the WC or SSP final. And when it comes to conduct, I always ask myself: "What if everyone does it?" What if everyone acts like Marin or Kyrgios or Sergio Ramos? What if all players change the shuttles 23 times a game? What if the people we meet in our own everyday sporting encounters act like that? Will we be able to enjoy the sport as much? I don't think so, not even remotely. Some will obviously think these are non-issues. Both sides should be able to voice their thoughts without animosity.
Djokovic bounces the ball 50 times before each serve. Football players dive to fool officials and win penalties. Football players walk off the field slowly when substituted when their team is in front to waste time. Football goalkeepers deliberately get yellow cards for time wasting. Basketball players will deliberately run down the shot timer when time is almost up before attacking when there's very little time left and they're in front. If I was to add others, Australian rules football players duck when being tackled in order to win high tackle free kicks. Cricket players take their time to slow down the number of overs being bowled in a test match in a day (and risk fines). I could go on and on.. In a competition, the ultimate objective is to win, and officials are there to officiate. Players will of course utilize everything at their disposal to win. Nobody will say "oh, I better be ethical and get on with the next point even though I need to catch my breath". Sportsmanship exists, such as shaking hands with your opponent as the first thing to do after a match, but ethics? Not really. That's what rules are for and what umpires/officials are for. The way I see it, slowing down play does not necessarily benefit any individual. The other player is resting too at the same time. Better fitness will show in the end no matter how many shuttle changes one makes. TTY didn't lose because the game was slowed down, she lost because she lifted two easy shots out of the court at a crucial moment. Sindhu delayed the SSF vs AY like crazy and did she win? No. The better player will always win. It's a non-issue.
All the band-wagon jumpers seem to be missing the point... and trying to justify why RI was not "breaking any rules" with her delaying tactics. And yet, at no point was it proposed that she was breaking any rules. The opinion is that her delaying tactics tainted the integrity of her win. Just like any of those examples above of football players milking the system to achieve a win; they may not be carded for breaking a rule...but does anyone look upon players who employ such tactics and think "wow, that was a great use of deliberate misrepresentation to get ahead and win the game - that player is my hero". I would conjecture to say most people with a sense of fair play would frown upon such misrepresentation, which was my opinion after watching RI milk every delaying tactic in the book in order to make up for lack of physical stamina. "Better player" is a highly subjective phrase with little criteria, and hardly one I would use to describe RI in winning that match.
Badminton is not a stamina contest. Stamina and endurance is only a small part of our sport. If athletes with strong stamina and endurance dominate our sport, we will lose our global appeal.
Like I said , making a mountain out of a molehill over IR's delaying tactics at worst or nitpicking at best when, as admitted, she didn't break any rules. To bring in ethical issues is a red herring fallacy. Let's call it part of the strategy, something which every coach knows and would let or even encourage their players to exploit without breaking the rules. Let's be honest, objective and realistic as @llrr aptly put it "In a competition, the ultimate objective is to win, and officials are there to officiate. Players will of course utilize everything at their disposal to win." Mind you, the opponent herself, TTY , didn't complain, it was a tight finish, down to the wire, there has to be a winner, and IR was lucky to emerge victorious narrowly on TTY's two final unforced errors. That's all there's to it, nothing complicated, nothing unusual.
I absolutely see your point. However, some your examples do not apply. Diving or timewasting by goalkeepers are examples of deliberately breaking the rules and are sanctioned by officials as a consequence. Especially diving is also looked down upon universally, even the fans of the respective players clubs don't like to see "their" players do that. This is certainly not remotely similar to frequent shuttle change, and nobody has suggested that. Another example that does not apply, is "running down the clock" in basketball. A team has 24 seconds for their attack as specified by the rules and shown by a big ass clock. Using that wisely is an important part of the game. The number of times a shuttle can be changed or how much time it can take are unspecified as far as I know, and thus nobody is breaking any rules doing it 20 times a game. I personally do not understand how it correlates with "play must be continuous", though. The tennis example is quite nice. Djokovic and Nadal both waste time a lot, and especially Nadal constantly does it, when things aren't going well. However, they are also violating specific rules with that and the umpires rarely do enforce those rules. It is basically officially sanctioned cheating allowed to the star players, highly unfair and a controversial subject in tennis, afaik. Common for all the examples you've given is one thing: it is done to gain an advantage. This is why I don't agree with this point. There are two reasons I can think of of 23 vs 0 shuttle changes, and the prime one is fitness. In my opinion, it will benefit the less fit player (who, in our example, is also the one doing the changes) more, because the other does not need a breather at all and is ready to play. It is leveling the playing field with an opponent who is either a) a more naturally gifted athlete, b) works harder on their fitness, c) does pay more attention to details like nutrition, regeneration and so on. The second reason I can think of, is trying to mess with the opponents concentration. This is something I really don't like (personal preference), and I think players and games are at their best when they get on a roll, when there's non-stop action and a great rhythm to the game. To me it always seems that the games get more error prone when they are interrupted all the time. Would be a nice subject for an empirical study, to find out if breaking up play or timewasting actually have an effect. I'm genuinely curious why do you think it is done at all. Especially with these extreme differences between certain players. It can't be for in-play reasons, because then all the best players would do it all the time, based on sports science. @Cheung You're right, I forgot about LD. What do you think? Maybe it is a little "schtick" for the maestro. Once again: This is obviously not cheating and a minor issue even from my point of view. I agree with you, however, that people will always find ways to one-up each other, so this is why I'm a big fan of regulating and impartial enforcement of rules. I also think fitness should be a very clear factor in especially the singles game. Limit shuttle change to 4 per game (with exceptions for damaged shuttles). This would hurt nobody, make the game more fast-paced and, dare I say, more attractive. Won't happen, of course.
I think Lin Dan likes new shuttles, the sight of a slightly frayed one irritates him, and at the same time he's trying to make more money for Yonex and setting an example for others to follow.
Don't know but I would guess even if someone else touched the shuttle, let alone hit it, he would change the shuttle (apart from the service judge of course).
I don't know about players in general but if I had a choice, I would change the shuttle with even the slightest defect. Don't understand why a player would ever not want to change a shuttle. I suppose it's mind-games to try to irritate the opponent. But since it happens so often these days, I don't know why players would still get distracted/irritated by an opponent not wanting to change the shuttle. Just get on with it.
