|
On August 01 2012 21:44 Fenrax wrote:
idiotic. "no there are no flaws in our system, our system works, it is good". And if you find flaws in it nonetheless, we justr ban you.
The format being flawed and the players being to blame are not mutually exclusive, though.
Beside, all the Chinese had to do to not face each other until the finals was not to lose a match. The second ranked Chinese pair lost a match, essentially meaning that their seeding for the tournament dropped from 2nd to 7th. The reward of the Danish pair that beat said Chinese pair was supposed to be avoiding the first seeded Chinese pair until the finals... until said pair lost their match on purpose. Definitively an issue with the player's behaviour.
Edit: also, China has been throwing matches for ever, even in single elimination format. In Athens two Chinese faced in the semis of the women's singles and the Chinese coach later admitted to having told the athletes in advance who of the two was supposed to win. If nothing else, the format just made it obvious that the Chinese team is willing to do that kind of thing.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On August 01 2012 21:43 Micket wrote:
The decision is an absolute joke. Should football teams gets disqualified for putting a reserve team out? Should Usain Bolt be disqualified for jogging a 200m semi's heat and coming 2nd?
Should swimmers be disqualified for not trying hard in a semi to conserve energy? An athlete shouldn't be forced to play in a situation where winning is disadvantageous, thats unfair on the athletes/
Apparantly. Better DQ Gold medal winner that ran or swam faster in finals than in semi finals. People came to watch good sport. Same in Starcraft. If a player shows his brilliant game winning build only in the final and not already in the Group stage against Nooby Mcnoobsen he should be DQed.
|
On August 01 2012 21:49 Svetz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 21:45 vasculaR wrote:On August 01 2012 21:42 Kipsate wrote:On August 01 2012 21:40 Fischbacher wrote:On August 01 2012 21:35 Telcontar wrote:
Well, admittedly, I didn't watch the matches, so I guess they had to do something if it was so obvious. Still, all this could've easily been avoided had they not implemented such a stupid format. Lessons to be learned on all sides. The same stupid format used in the FIFA world cup  China didn't want to play China, that doesn't happen in FIFA world cup. You're right. But a team may want to avoid a better opponent. Same situation imo... Not really, avoiding your own country means you can get double the medals....
I'm not trying to turn it into a debate but you guys aren't considering the other 3 pairs of players who also threw games. They weren't doing to "avoid" countrymen/women.
I actually like the format. Not really sure about double elimination knockout in badminton. But training for such an occasion and getting knocked out in the first round (and might have to be sent back home already) against a really top tier team isn't really nice as well..
|
On August 01 2012 21:50 Ghostcom wrote:
About time BWF did this. China has been throwing/fixing the system for ages - and no matter how much you want to make this a parallel to a footballteam putting on the reserves it just isn't a correct parallel. Serving into the net 9 times in a row isn't a "bad day" or "conserving energy" it is blatantly throwing a game.
EDIT: With regards to the above. China could still have gotten 2 medals as whoever would have lost in the semis would've taken the bronze without a shadow of doubt.
weren't they going to meet in qtrs?
|
On August 01 2012 21:56 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 21:50 Ghostcom wrote:
About time BWF did this. China has been throwing/fixing the system for ages - and no matter how much you want to make this a parallel to a footballteam putting on the reserves it just isn't a correct parallel. Serving into the net 9 times in a row isn't a "bad day" or "conserving energy" it is blatantly throwing a game.
EDIT: With regards to the above. China could still have gotten 2 medals as whoever would have lost in the semis would've taken the bronze without a shadow of doubt. weren't they going to meet in qtrs?
Danish media has said semis repeatedly, but I won't put it past them to have gotten it wrong, I'll check the grid when I get home from work 
|
On August 01 2012 22:02 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 21:56 Doraemon wrote:On August 01 2012 21:50 Ghostcom wrote:
About time BWF did this. China has been throwing/fixing the system for ages - and no matter how much you want to make this a parallel to a footballteam putting on the reserves it just isn't a correct parallel. Serving into the net 9 times in a row isn't a "bad day" or "conserving energy" it is blatantly throwing a game.
EDIT: With regards to the above. China could still have gotten 2 medals as whoever would have lost in the semis would've taken the bronze without a shadow of doubt. weren't they going to meet in qtrs? Danish media has said semis repeatedly, but I won't put it past them to have gotten it wrong, I'll check the grid when I get home from work
i'm not sure myself, but i thought it was quarters. i shall check too
Their defeat meant Yu and Wang avoided playing fellow Chinese pair Tian Qing and Zhao Yunlei, who had finished second in Group D, in the quarter-finals which are due to be played later Wednesday.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/olympics/news-london-2012/badminton-players-disqualified-reports-20120801-23fv2.html#ixzz22IcRWhP5
|
I agree with the DQ decision. It's sad that the only thing reason they put badminton in the headlines here is when a 'scandal' like this happens.
|
So what happens to the tournament now? Since 4 teams were DQ'd they could take the remaining competitors and call it a semifinals, or they could bump up the next highest finishers in the group stage.
|
On August 01 2012 22:07 red4ce wrote:
So what happens to the tournament now? Since 4 teams were DQ'd they could take the remaining competitors and call it a semifinals, or they could bump up the next highest finishers in the group stage.
i would like to know too. assuming its the latter?
|
On August 01 2012 21:52 Fischbacher wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 21:44 Fenrax wrote:
idiotic. "no there are no flaws in our system, our system works, it is good". And if you find flaws in it nonetheless, we justr ban you. The format being flawed and the players being to blame are not mutually exclusive, though.
Agreed.
Yes, the format isn't ideal, and it could easily be fixed by randomizing the seeds after group stage. (and letting the top seeds of the groups play last wasn't such a bright idea either, I wonder who organizes such tournaments if I could do it better)
But no one who watched the game can pretend the code of conduct was not violated, it was blatantly obvious the players didn't give their best effort and thus violated the rules.
Disqualification is harsh, but can be justified.
I wonder if Wang/Yu are now mad at Tian/Zhao for losing to Denmark, which put them in the awkward position of wanting to lose in the first place.
|
On August 01 2012 22:03 Doraemon wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:02 Ghostcom wrote:On August 01 2012 21:56 Doraemon wrote:On August 01 2012 21:50 Ghostcom wrote:
About time BWF did this. China has been throwing/fixing the system for ages - and no matter how much you want to make this a parallel to a footballteam putting on the reserves it just isn't a correct parallel. Serving into the net 9 times in a row isn't a "bad day" or "conserving energy" it is blatantly throwing a game.
EDIT: With regards to the above. China could still have gotten 2 medals as whoever would have lost in the semis would've taken the bronze without a shadow of doubt. weren't they going to meet in qtrs? Danish media has said semis repeatedly, but I won't put it past them to have gotten it wrong, I'll check the grid when I get home from work i'm not sure myself, but i thought it was quarters. i shall check too Their defeat meant Yu and Wang avoided playing fellow Chinese pair Tian Qing and Zhao Yunlei, who had finished second in Group D, in the quarter-finals which are due to be played later Wednesday.Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/olympics/news-london-2012/badminton-players-disqualified-reports-20120801-23fv2.html#ixzz22IcRWhP5
http://www.london2012.com/badminton/event/women-doubles/phase=bdw002300/index.html
says the chinese teams could have met not earlier than in the semi finals
|
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out.
|
They're not getting punished for throwing the match. They're getting punished for not doing a well enough job to hide the fact that they were throwing the match. If you're going to be an Olympian you need to learn how to make it look good when you throw a match and to know how far you can take it before you will be punished for your level of play. That's pretty much the only message that punishing the players sends.
|
On August 01 2012 19:29 Aim Here wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 19:21 Boblhead wrote:
it defeats the whole purpose of competition. By throwing games its not even a competition anymore. I for one disagree with these players by saying just play the fucking game instead of disgracing your country by not giving it 110% every match.
Then they wouldn't be giving the tournament 100%, because winning the single badminton game was making their chances of winning the tournament worse. The athletes were in a double-bind here, they had to choose whether to do what they had to do to win the tournament or to win the match. They couldn't do both at the same time. It was an unfair position for them to be in. The tournament organisers shouldn't have put them in that position in the first place.
Sorry, but you have to try and win no matter who you face in the next round. Sometimes you get an unlucky draw but that is no excuse for throwing games. There is no justification for playing to lose during the Olympics.
They were rightly disqualified.
|
On August 01 2012 22:20 Maenander wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:03 Doraemon wrote:On August 01 2012 22:02 Ghostcom wrote:On August 01 2012 21:56 Doraemon wrote:On August 01 2012 21:50 Ghostcom wrote:
About time BWF did this. China has been throwing/fixing the system for ages - and no matter how much you want to make this a parallel to a footballteam putting on the reserves it just isn't a correct parallel. Serving into the net 9 times in a row isn't a "bad day" or "conserving energy" it is blatantly throwing a game.
EDIT: With regards to the above. China could still have gotten 2 medals as whoever would have lost in the semis would've taken the bronze without a shadow of doubt. weren't they going to meet in qtrs? Danish media has said semis repeatedly, but I won't put it past them to have gotten it wrong, I'll check the grid when I get home from work i'm not sure myself, but i thought it was quarters. i shall check too Their defeat meant Yu and Wang avoided playing fellow Chinese pair Tian Qing and Zhao Yunlei, who had finished second in Group D, in the quarter-finals which are due to be played later Wednesday.Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/olympics/news-london-2012/badminton-players-disqualified-reports-20120801-23fv2.html#ixzz22IcRWhP5 http://www.london2012.com/badminton/event/women-doubles/phase=bdw002300/index.htmlsays the chinese teams could have met not earlier than in the semi finals
lol, aussie media is not to be trusted....this is where news corp started!
|
On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out.
Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around.
|
How can people condone any sort of match fixing?
Those saying it increases their chance to win: Wth, where is the difference in meeting someone in the SF or finals?
To win you have to beat them anyway.
|
On August 01 2012 21:43 Micket wrote:
The decision is an absolute joke. Should football teams gets disqualified for putting a reserve team out? Should Usain Bolt be disqualified for jogging a 200m semi's heat and coming 2nd?
Should swimmers be disqualified for not trying hard in a semi to conserve energy? An athlete shouldn't be forced to play in a situation where winning is disadvantageous, thats unfair on the athletes/
swimmers and runners aren't gaming the system, whether they race for getting 1st or 8th in the overall semi they still race against the same opponents in the finals. those athletes are just trying to make it past a cut. the badmitton players are purposely playing inadequately in order to avoid one opponent for another in the next round. that's a different situation, and is unsportsmanlike. when you play in the olympics, you play in the olympic spirit of fair competition.
the organizers had a non-ideal format, but it's no excuse for players to take advantage of the system like that. like if you accidentally left your front door open one night, it doesn't give anyone the right to come in and rob you while you sleep just because the opportunity was there.
|
On August 01 2012 22:34 sharkie wrote:
How can people condone any sort of match fixing?
Those saying it increases their chance to win: Wth, where is the difference in meeting someone in the SF or finals?
To win you have to beat them anyway.
To maximise your chance of getting a medal (there ARE prizes for 2nd and 3rd, remember) you play the hardest dudes last.
|
On August 01 2012 22:28 red4ce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out. Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around.
Yes I was talking to some friends about it (they don't pay much attention to Olympics) and I realized that badminton is one of very few (the only one i can think of) with this kind of matching.
This only applies to 1 team vs 1 team games (which they wanted to a easy opponent in this case), where all of them are not taking place simultaneously (If it was simultaneous, you wouldn't know who's ranked high and who to avoid or who's easy).
They should have been seeded/placed the moment they qualified.
And this is nothing like a under-the-table match fixing that's so hated on. It's still technically match fixing but this wasn't a consensus where both teams agreed on the result with/without money involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
