http://www.badzine.net/2020/01/seo-seung-jae-team-contract-controversy-casts-pall-over-2020-debut/
this would suck big time...
this would suck big time...
Seo Seung Jae (서승재)
- Thread starter samkool
- Start date
Not a direct response to the article but I am wondering if it would be too late to bring the thread title in line with what seems to be the convention on names. It seems to me that calling the thread 'Seo Seung Jae (서승재)' would be more in line with how other player threads have been titled.
And yes, the worst case scenario would indeed suck.
And yes, the worst case scenario would indeed suck.
j4ckie
Regular Member
Amazing that one person can be coach of both the ntl team and a club team, and players can be suspended from the ntl team if they have contract disputes with the unrelated club teams...conflict of interest, anyone?
Personally I don't get why there are rules to suspend players from the ntl team for something not related to it. However, this seems at first read like Seo was just kind of dumb to sign two different contracts, although I can imagine scenarios where he might have been pressured into signing the first one (coach having a 'discussion' with him about it, for example...).
That part is rare, at least in recent memory. Kim Joong Soo was chair of a provincial association while coaching the national team but he was not in charge of any pro team, as far as I can recall. Sung Han Kook was Head Coach of Daekyo when he took over the national team but Ra Kyung Min, who was hired as a Daekyo coach shortly thereafter, admitted she was going to be doing all the coaching and sure enough, within the year, she had taken over Sung's job. Lee Deuk Choon and Kang Kyung Jin were working solely for the BKA as national team coaches and not for any pro teams.
j4ckie
Regular Member
I find it interesting that it's even allowed, since the ntl coach could easily give preferential treatment to his club's players. Even subconsciously they're bound to favor them.
Neel Dhebar
Regular Member
Will SSJ be allowed to play the events he has already entered, like the German and All England Opens?
that would solely depend on kba. but i don't see kba spending the $ on him if they're going to cut him. kba can also avoid the $5,000 top committed player fine because once ssj is cut he is no longer considered a player.
despite chae yu jung & choi sol gyu getting screwed olympic wise guess who benefits the most from this? ko sung hyun!
ksh/shin baek cheol & ksh/eom hye won are the next highest ranked pairs from korea in md & xd.
Ko/Eom would still have to pass the Danes and the Russians in order to be invited.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'avoid the fine'. The fine will still be levied, unless Seo declares to the BWF that he is retiring. The question is whether the BKA will also refuse to enter him in tournaments if he agrees to transport himself across the sea. Such a refusal has precedent, as Ko/Shin know all too well. They obviously did away with the age restriction and with the accomplishment restriction that at one time prevented Eom from competing overseas, but at the same time, we don't know if they will now agree to enter any player who wishes it. Of course, refusing to enter Seo in the All England would be tantamount to forcing him to be fined, unless he can avoid the fine by flying there for a press conference as I believe Ko Sung Hyun did once.
according to this chart the russians are already in, and the danes are not: https://bwfbadminton.com/rankings/1...on/76/mixed-doubles/2020/6/?rows=50&page_no=1 ... it is possible the danes are grouped with the netherlands for qualification purposes because they are not given a # in the far left column. otherwise yes, they are higher than ko/eom. hmmm...
to clarify: yes and no. kba will be responsible for the fine since bwf has no jurisdiction or 'membership' contracts with players. all of bwf's legal obligations/jurisdictions are between bwf and member associations. seo will not have to pay. so, yes, bwf can still levy the fine but kba can can say 'we released him from kba. he does not play for us.' seo can still be registered as a bwf player but cannot enter any tournaments unless any other association enters him. any member association can enter any registered bwf player into a tournament to play singles or doubles with any other player they want to as long as it is ok with a players current 'owner'... but if seo is cut by kba he is a free agent and kba will have zero say in the matter. ie. canada can enter seo into one tournament, and the usa can enter him in another.
a 2nd however: seo cannot compete in the olympics for another association unless he is also a citizen of that country (olympic rules). does he have dual c'ship? doesn't matter because he won't have enough points with any other partner.
for kba to avoid paying the fine they have to release seo. if kba cuts him, his career is pretty much over unless seo cares to make a major life changing shift for badminton. kba can also still pay the fine & not release seo in order to maintain 'ownership' of him & treat him like he doesn't exist if they want to.
badminton is an individual sport run under quasi team rules thanks to the dictators/overlords @ bwf.
does that sort of clear it up?
Neel Dhebar
Regular Member
I don't know if I understood correctly, but if he is 'released' by KBA, can Canada enter Choi/Seo in a tournament, with them representing Korea?
they would each enter separately but play as a pair, provided kba gives their ok to choi... which i doubt they would.
as far as 'representing' korea... the players do not 'represent' a country because these are not team events. korea, or any country, does not 'win' the all england. in the smaller tournaments you see doubles players paired up with players from different countries all the time.
bwf's dictator-ish rules only make it seem like it's country vs. country.
The chart you referenced is based on current world rankings, not on points earned since the qualification period began. This one is more relevant. However, the main difference is that in the rankings I reference, a continental spot has been taken. That could easily change, as the top African and Oceanian pairs are at #51 and #50 respectively and could well be pushed out, considering how many pairs outside the top 50 haven't played 10 tournaments yet. If that happens, the Danes and Ko/Eom would still be chasing the Russians. If the Australians and Egyptians both make it to the top 50, then only 13 spots remain, and then you'd have the Germans and Wang/Cheng to contend with also.
This sounds like a plan for the BKA, but is there a BWF rule you can cite that allows for this? This contradicts your statement that 'all of bwf's legal obligations/jurisdictions are between bwf and member associations', which is obviously consistent with the BWF only accepting tournament entries from MAs as opposed to individual players. If the BKA had access to such a loophole, the BWF would have to break the convention you just cited and go demanding money from Seo directly or it would have to demand that Seo find himself a new MA for the purpose of paying the fine, an option that is ludicrous on its face. Remember that one of the issues when Ko left the national team was an impasse wherein he refused to retire, demanding that the BKA enter him in big tournaments, while the BKA refused to enter a non-national team member under the age of 31 and urged him to retire so there wouldn't be a fine every time he missed an SSP event.
Let's just drop the notion of Seo emigrating, with or without one of his partners. That's never going to happen. The next step is an appeal and assuming that fails, all the Korean media reports say that one BKA official said it was worth waiting & seeing if the BKA changes its mind in May. What we know is that Seo/Chae will have enough points to qualify even if they stop playing for 3 months. There is no way that Tabeling/Piek, Lamsfuss/Herttrich, Gicquel/Delrue, Wang/Cheng, and Alimov/Davletova will all get above the 63,000-point mark by then given that they've all played 15 tournaments already.
Last edited:
it is my understanding bwf is updating it weekly and it is specific to olympic qualifying, save for the tripartite (wildcard) rules.
"The World Ranking Lists of 28 April 2020 will be used to allocate the athletes Quota Places in Men’s and Women’s Singles, and Men’s, Women’s and Mixed Doubles."
i'm not so sure the # of points you accumulate during the qualifying period matters. if i'm ranked #3 at the start and you #9, then you accumulate more points than me during the qualifying period, but at the end of the qualifying period i'm still ranked #3, and you #4, i will still be seeded higher than you for the tournament.
also, from what i understand reading the reg's the 'noc' allotment criteria is used before the continental allotment...?
anyhow, every time i read the reg's it becomes less clear. https://extranet.bwfbadminton.com/docs/document-system/81/1466/1471/Section 5.4.1.1 - OG - Qualifying Regulations for Tokyo 2020 (ENG).pdf[/quote]
nothing is coming up when i click your link. i'm very interested in seeing it. have a better link?
may? ha! smfh...
it is my understanding bwf is updating it weekly and it is specific to olympic qualifying, save for the tripartite (wildcard) rules.
"The World Ranking Lists of 28 April 2020 will be used to allocate the athletes Quota Places in Men’s and Women’s Singles, and Men’s, Women’s and Mixed Doubles."
i'm not so sure the # of points you accumulate during the qualifying period matters. if i'm ranked #3 at the start and you #9, then you accumulate more points than me during the qualifying period, but at the end of the qualifying period i'm still ranked #3, and you #4, i will still be seeded higher than you for the tournament.
also, from what i understand reading the reg's the 'noc' allotment criteria is used before the continental allotment...?
anyhow, every time i read the reg's it becomes less clear: https://extranet.bwfbadminton.com/docs/document-system/81/1466/1471/Section 5.4.1.1 - OG - Qualifying Regulations for Tokyo 2020 (ENG).pdf https://www.tournamentsoftware.com/ranking/category.aspx?id=23408&category=3550&p=1&ps=100
nothing is coming up when i click your link, but i'm very interested in seeing it. have a better link?
it's not a rule, but more of an interpretation of contract language. bka and bwf would have to settle the matter on their own through mediation/arbitration/court/whatever if they care to take it that far.
bwf would have no legal standing to do so since there is no contract binding seo to bwf.
again, bwf has no legal standing to demand anything of seo.
in the smaller and less rich assoc's player fines usually play out between the player and their assoc... the assoc. has to pay bwf, then the assoc. tells the player they will not enter them in anymore tournaments until they reimburse the assoc. whatever happens in seo's case will be settled between bka and seo.
ko v. bka was a domestic civil legal matter challenging the legality of bka's rules inflicted upon korean citizens. bwf was a peripheral party to the suit, yet had no legal standing to make any concessions, demands or influence. ko's player status, active or retired, as viewed by bwf was irrelevant to the case. if fine's were piling up on behalf of ksh and bwf wanted their money that would be a bwf v. bka matter.
seo could take the same route and sue bka to enter him in tournaments, but bka could (and likely would) restrict (pressure) chae & choi from playing with him. i cannot speculate what bka would actually do as i do not know anyone inside of bka. all i do know is that this colossally sucks for all the players involuntarily attached in this spat.
i became an even bigger fan of ksh for standing up and challenging this aspect of the current archaic system.
it will take a very rich player/person with nothing but time on their hands to sue bwf in order to overturn the current system.
Last edited:
The link you used was to the 'notional rankings' while the link I used was to the 'Race to Tokyo' rankings. They both apply the same qualifying rules but to different ranking lists. The difference is that the former includes, for example, AE2019 points so disbanded pairs like Ahmad/Kandow and Gondo/Kurihara are further up the list than in the Race to Tokyo. That matters because the continental allotment takes precedence. If Pan Am, Africa, and Oceania all have pairs in the top 50, then there will only be 13 other pairs chosen by the NOC allotment criteria. As it is, there will be a maximum of 15 others, since Canada's spot is secure, but we could have Australia, Egypt, or both or neither by April 28th.
So to summarize, what you wrote earlier about "bwf can still levy the fine but kba can can say 'we released him from kba. he does not play for us'" is speculation on a possible legal dispute that the BKA could pioneer, not a statement on how the relationship between the BWF and MAs actually functions.
That is correct that the BWF was not involved. My point was that BWF fine issue came up in reports about the issue because it related to the BKA's demands of Ko. The BKA had rules (which Ko was contesting) that said Ko couldn't be entered in SSP events at age 30. From their point of the BKA, they had only two ways to avoid incurring BWF fines: 1) Ko retires, as Shin, Kim, Lee, and Yoo had; 2) enter Ko in SSP events. The BKA wanted option 1, Ko wanted option 2. But yes, you are correct, that the actual legal case involved getting the BKA to reverse their opposition to option 2. You might think that Ko had some leverage in the case the BKA wanted him to do something for them that would stop them bleeding money. As for Shin, he had already retired so it cost the BKA nothing to deny him entry into tournaments.
In the case of Seo, as long as the BKA has the power to accept the Tokyo invitation, he is unlikely to play hardball. The BWF has new rules about deregistration and retirement which seem to suggest that if Seo were to use either of these, he might need 3 months notice to return to action. The BKA might be able to get away without being fined, depending on how the following regulation is interpreted:
2.7. BWF may waive the penalty as specified in clauses 2.3 and 2.5 in certain exceptional circumstances (such as forced military service or similar), Player suspension (by BWF or Members) and official Player retirement (following submission of official retirement form to BWF)
Neel Dhebar
Regular Member
His name is in the All England Open draw which was published earlier today. So I guess they will let him play? Otherwise, they would have withdrawn him.
i saw this too so i was wondering...
i think bka knows not to mess up our slim chance of medaling in xd/md (very very small chance i know)..so maybe his punishment is for him to foot his own bill for travel and hotel accommodation? korea is harsh but not letting him compete in olympics would be dumb
realistically, ASY is korea's only chance of medaling.
too bad lyd/kgj didnt perform at a higher level in 2019...