four pairs from china, south korea and indonesia trying to loose their matches so as to get an easier match in the next round.... purposely hitting the cock into the net or hitting it out of court.
It's simpy not cricket, is it?
If you're hitting cocks, you need to do it with conviction!
I think one of the Chinese pairs were trying to avoid the other Chinese pair in order to maximise Chinese medal prospects. Not that that excuses them or anything.
I like that the Korean coach basically said 'they started it' about the Chinese, rather than protesting innocence.
I'd have done the same. The Olympics ( or any high level sport) is about maximising chances of a medal. Aus and Ger didn't exactly pull from the gun in the men's RR but nobody suggested DQing them, it's just tactics.
leggyblonde - MemberI'd have done the same. The Olympics ( or any high level sport) is about maximising chances of a medal. Aus and Ger didn't exactly pull from the gun in the men's RR but nobody suggested DQing them, it's just tactics.
No comparison.
It's not like they both repeatedly rode their bikes into the crash barriers, is it?
Eh? It is the same.
The badminton folks are being accused of not trying their hardest. Not of deliberately cocking stuff up.
I think there is a subtle difference between saving energy for later stages, and actively trying to lose to achieve a different draw in those stages.
It would be easy to solve this kind of thing by doing away with 'rounds' in the early stages and having straight elimination instead.
They were deliberately cocking it up though. They were hitting the shuttlecock into the net on purpose.
There's no comparison with a cyclist who may ride at 90% maximum capacity so as to preserve energy for a later surge in an attempt to WIN a race.
I wouldn't say it's really comparable, but that's what you get when you end up with a match situation where it's more profitable to lose. It's about winning, not competing, to these players.
Hardly anything the umpire can do either, you end up in a total nightmare situation. Tell them to play properly and the mistakes will just get more subtle, but the rallies still won't last, as you've got to make the mistake before the opponent does.
I'd be proper pissed if I was spectating though. We've got semi final tickets though, so that shouldn't be a problem 😀
Not the same as the cycling at all. They should have been disqualified.
I'd have done the same. The Olympics ( or any high level sport) is about maximising chances of a medal.
At the risk of sounding like a Seb Coe soundbite, I'd like to think it's about something more than just getting a medal any way you can.
They are not playing to lose really if you think about it
Its a tournament, not a single match. So the overall result is what makes the winner.
All they are doing is playing to maximise there chances of Winning overall.
Is it any different from track cycling, sprinters hovering for ages in a tactical battle waiting for the perfect time to attack.
Tactics to increase the overall chance of winning.
how about a swimmer taking it easy on his first length only to come back stronger?
Disqualify them. What they did shows contempt for the Olympics and the spectators.
There's a load the umpire can do, and in fact did do, he showed one pair a black card and as such DQ'd them, however that was then rescinded!
It was obvious what they were doing but the whole set up of the competition was ludicrous, any team that had won it's opening two matches didnt need to win their 3rd (roughly) and as such they're going to play it tactically.
Sucks for the spectators that want to see a competition but the fault at the end of the day has to lie with the authorities that put in a tournament that was so obviously open to 'abuse'
If we're equating it to other sports then imagine a swimmer that's already swam the qualifying time being asked to race another heat...
Change it to a true knock-out tournament.
The reason these "mini-leagues" were invented was to maximise the number of matches (money) and reduce the risk of an upset and a top seed getting through to the final (I'm thinking Champions League here...)
If we're equating it to other sports then imagine a swimmer that's already swam the qualifying time being asked to race another heat...
Or if Murray had got into the final 4, and then had to play someone to decide who he played in the semi, and he just hit balls into the crowd the entire match to avoid Federer until the final.
Perhaps the US basketball team should be DQed for not playing 100% in games against weaker teams too or saving their stars for the later games.
Is it any different from track cycling, sprinters hovering for ages in a tactical battle waiting for the perfect time to attack.
It's [i]totally[/i] different. What the badmintoners(?) were doing is gaming the tournament, which is right out of order.
They are not playing to lose really if you think about it
That is exactly what they were doing. All the pairs in question had qualified for the next round and were attempting to rig the next round to get what they would consider to be an easier opponent.
Whilst I completely disagree with it, is it similar to a team (e.g. football) who have already qualified with a game to go playing a sub standard squad to rest key players?
Whilst I completely disagree with it, is it similar to a team (e.g. football) who have already qualified with a game to go playing a sub standard squad to rest key players?
If those sub standard players were then asked to score own goals, yes.
Whilst I completely disagree with it, is it similar to a team (e.g. football) who have already qualified with a game to go playing a sub standard squad to rest key players?
There is a huge difference between not trying very hard and trying to lose on purpose to gain an advantage.
Perhaps the US basketball team should be DQed for not playing 100% in games against weaker teams too or saving their stars for the later games.
No they're (allong with the german cyclists) trying to get a win with the minimum effort either by saving their good players for harder matches, or saving their sprinter for the finish. The badminton players were deliberately trying to lose a game.
Should all be DQ IMO.
I think it's unfair to blame the players.
The idea is to win - otherwise why have medals.
If your chances of winning are improved by loosing, then not attempting to loose would mean that your not committed to the goal of winning a medal.
IMO the retards who designed such a dumb ass system that this could happen should be stuck in the lime-light and booted out rather than the teams just trying to maximise their chance of winning.
Disqualify them. They took the Olympic Oath and then reneged upon it:
[url= http://registration.olympic.org/en/faq/detail/id/28 ][i]"In the name of all the competitors I promise that we shall take part in these Olympic Games, respecting and abiding by the rules which govern them, committing ourselves to a sport without doping and without drugs, [b]in the true spirit of sportsmanship[/b], for the glory of sport and the honour of our teams".[/i][/url]
Don't really like the 'spirit' of what they were doing but I can understand what they were.
Suppose it's akin to a runner running slightly slower so he/she can get into a weaker semi final where, say, the first four go through to the final. It's just in a sport like badminton you have to lose a point rather than just jogging round that last 33% of the lap.
I'd always assumed leagues were there so weaker nations at least got a couple of games rather than getting stuffed in the first round.
If you're hitting cocks, you need to do it with conviction!
<Tannoy> Emma82 to the forum </Tannoy>
Disqualified now. Nice to see a quick and effective decision.
Disqualified now. Nice to see a quick and effective decision.
Wow, really?
"Chief Olympic correspondent Paul Kelso tweets:
BREAKING: All eight badminton players have been disqualified from the Olympics"
more to follow
so says the Telegraph live feed.
Ooooo there's gonna be toys out the pram everywhere.
Right decision though.
Wow! Big decision.
Ooooo there's gonna be toys out the pram everywhere.
I doubt they'll have the strength or power to launch them out of the pram. Something to do with saving energy...
I doubt they'll have the strength or power to launch them out of the pram. Something to do with saving energy...
I don't think you've understood the issue at all (or you're just being silly) 🙂
They've been DQ'd now.
[edit] old news apparently! STW is quicker than yahoo!
The objective is to win the gold medal, not"entertain" people because they paid a lot of money for their seats. The teams were just using the most effective strategy within the rules of the competition. It's not their fault if the competition structure is flawed.
Charging them with not trying is just daft. How do you measure "best efforts"? Would it have been OK if they won by 5 points? Or only one point? Or if they only just lost? At what point would you draw the line for an acceptable level of effort? You can't. There is only win or lose.
One of the mopper-uppers viewpoint who I believe is a county standard player. Mrs B is a game-maker and at the Badminton showing people to there seats etc:
[url= http://jksalisbury.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/scandal-at-mopping-hq.html?spref=tw ]Scandal[/url]
or you're just being silly
Silly? You clearly don't understand how serious a game badminton is.
*walks off muttering under breath*
kcr (moot point as they've been disqualified) they were deliberately serving into the net and hitting the shuttle out of the court.
The objective is to win the gold medal, not"entertain" people because they paid a lot of money for their seats. The teams were just using the most effective strategy within the rules of the competition. It's not their fault if the competition structure is flawed.
Charging them with not trying is just daft. How do you measure "best efforts"? Would it have been OK if they won by 5 points? Or only one point? Or if they only just lost? At what point would you draw the line for an acceptable level of effort? You can't. There is only win or lose.
Completely true, but you can't change the structure of the tournament half way through. Fact is, they ignored a direct and reasonable order from the umpire. It's what I'd do (if I were the umpire).
Crikey - firm action!
So what contries get let back in following their elimination or are they just skipping a round?
I understand that. How many serves into the net, or out of court hits would it take to count as unacceptable efforts?
