Thread: 2012 London Olympics

Don't know if this is offtoptic or not and I don't want to wade through 43 pages of talk but what's the reaction here about the badminton disqualification that happened during the Olympics? Anyone upset at the IOC or the badminton federation rather than the athletes?

Weren’t there other athletes who did not perform at their best at various moments in the tournament (i.e. Blake and Bolt during the heats)?

Also if IOC’s fear was match fixing for betting purposes then couldn’t the same be said for betting purposes during say the 100 heats as well? Couldn’t the “match” fixing simply be “I won’t attempt break the world record in this heat” or “I won’t attempt to do a 9 second run”

Any thoughts?

Also since I'm new here, would a new thread have been preferable? If so is it too late? Thanks

Doesn't seem like an unreasonable place to discuss it at all!

I fully support decision to disquality, although personally I place as much, if not more, of the responsibility for it on the shoulders of the coaches as the atheletes themselves. If it wasn't their idea the coaches should immediately have put a stop to it, and if it was.....well they should be ashamed of themselves. There may have been an issue with the way the competition is structured, but that just wasn't the way to deal with it at all.

As far as the analogies with the other events go, there's a difference between saving yourself (and not quite doing your very best, but doing just enough to do what you need to to get through without risking pushing yourself to the limits) and trying intentionally to actually lose a game in the ridiculous way that they were doing.

Originally Posted by cenydd

there's a difference between saving yourself and trying intentionally to actually lose a game in the ridiculous way that they were doing.

Well in a way the badminton players were trying to save themselves for their next more important event just like the sprinters. I agree with you that there is a difference between the two but is it really that big? In both instances athletes do the bare minimum to advance to the next round.

Yes the footage is very incriminating and yes people did pay good money to see the event live as well, but, sportsmen and women don't usually choose to get disqualified. And that leaves me wondering... why couldn't the officials have had the foresight to avoid the situation? Why couldn't the rules have been clear? If you watch the video interview of the head of the Badminton World Federation linked below, you'll see that there is a sense on uneasiness there.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012...s-disqualified

Dig a hole in a street and someone is bound to fall into it. Some will point and say "Well they should've been more attentive and they have no one to blame but themselves" and some will say "what the heck, who put a hole in the middle of the bloody road!? That's unsafe and could cause serious injury". Both are correct but I think the latter view is the most dignified and constructive.

I hope they make the necessary amendments so that athletes can no longer DQ themselves by attempting to find an advantage wherever it may be. Homogenized and blunted competition might as well be called art.

Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo

Maybe you're right....

In the following video clip, you can see anti-Japanese protesters smashing and overturning a police car in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen. It's laughable that the Chinese "nationalists" were doing such irrational acts while waving their national flags. This is what I call "cents of humour". Either the Chinese protesters were so lost in their frenzy of protest that they treated their own police as Japanese occupation force or they imagined themselves to be Japanese invaders vandalising everything in their path!

Chinese protesters attack cars in anti-Japan demonstration
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3TlNdDVCgM

Originally Posted by Albert Di Salvo

.....It's good to see you again dear uncle.

It's proud for anyone to be called "uncle" by the "Houdini of the cyberspace".