Two different things. Although in both siutations the best strength is not presented for the competition, it is probably ok to reserve the best players for later critical games. That is a game strategy. However, it is entirely different to have the player playing not give 100% at all, or worse deliberately lose the game. That's like fixing a game, not a game strategy. I see there is a principal difference between the two. NBA is strictly against the latter, while somewhat ok with the first as long as there is a reasonalbe excuse, e.g. the best player has an injury, whatever that might be. It is a harsh punishment, but I think fair. Yes, it sucks for those disqualified atheletes, particularly the Chinese couple, who dominated the woman double this year in all competitions. But on the other hand, I am glad the IOC makes it clear there is a strict rule against fixing or deliberatly losing games in the Olympics. That is just a disgrace to the spirit of Olympics. On the other hand, if the qualifying mechanism is flawed, Chinese, Korean, Indonesia Badminton orgnizations should have voiced their disapproval and exerted their influences to change that mechanism. There is no excuse for not wanting to win game in the name of unfair qualiying mechanism.
if the rules allow this to happen then so be it, don't hate the player hate the game. Competitors have a right to play how they see fit, and what gives them the best chance to win. It's all about putting yourself in the best situation. Last I checked, it not against the rules to hit the ball into the net repeatedly. They weren't cheating, they were playing the game. What needs to happen is the rules need to be designed to prevent or discourage this somehow.
To be fair with Phelps, I think he has proved his deserved place in the history of the sports by winning that many gold medals in Beijing. It's hard for him to repeat that feat amongster the best of best. I don't fault him for not trying or training as hard as some of his teammates asscused him of. He had done it all, what more does he need to prove. On the other hand, I also think to say he is the most decorated Olympians is bit overboard. The 1980 US men's hockey team were great, against all odds. Louganis was great, especially for what he did in the Seoul Olympics. Yes, Phelps will probably have the most medals at the end of his career, but aside from his greatness, there are just so many races left and right he could collect the medals. There is only one medal for the US men's hockey team and in my mind it can't be said that what Phelps has acheived topped that.
They shouldn't incentivize losing then. Group play was introduced to this badminton Olympics when it previously wasn't. There's a reason it wasn't that way before because it doesn't work. It leads to jockeying for position. Every team does this when it's close to the end of group play. NBA teams will throw games to have a more favorable matchup in the playoffs. NFL teams rest their starters the last game to prevent injury heading into the playoffs. Nobody bats an eye. Don't hate the player, hate the game. Everybody does it because the rules allow it.
If you check out the game between the Chinese and Korean couples, you will see how deliberate it was. NBA or NFL will punish putting the ball in your own net or stop defending and just let the other side run it through as well. It was that deliberate. There is a line between tolerable sneaky game strategy and blatant throwing game.
I think part of the problem of throwing games in a round robin tournament is not only that those teams are artificially deflating their own record, but they're artificially inflating the records of the teams they're playing against. The teams they tank against may move on to the next round while the teams they really played against may not and it's not fair to those teams if they get knocked out early in part because they happened to face the Chinese before they started tanking. In that case, they wouldn't only be manipulating their seed, but manipulating who moves on, whether intentionally or not.
I did watch highlights of it. And I still have no problem with what they did. Why compete hard if it ends in a less favorable matchup? If you honestly believe that NBA or NFL teams don't throw their games, then you must think emptying the bench at the first substitution opportunity is 100% competing. They are able to do it with "sneaky game strategy" because the rules of the games are so different. They are timed, and as such it allows them to fake effort until the last few minutes that decide the game. You can't do that in sports that end by points. Thus, the hits into the net and out of bounds. As I said before, change the game. Get rid of group play. That's the only way.
They were disqualified because the way they played those games, so balatant. The funny thing is that both sides didn't want to win. Sure, the group play is flawed and the qualifying rules should incentivize wining. I agree. But, that should have been dealt with beforehand and not by having players hit the ball into the net and out of bounds. IOC has every right to disqualify those players for their obvious mockery of the Olympic sprits and many agree that is a reasonable decision. This is all.
Right, that was what's behind the Korean and Indonesia game, both wanted to avoid the Yu/Wang combo of China. Yu/Wang OTOH wanted to avoid the other Chinese combo, which in a real competition lost to a Demark couple in the earlier group play. There was juggling and scrambling for a better chance to win medals and they all did it all so obvious.
China gold again in diving and table tennis. Looks like they'll sweep all golds in these two categories. They'll probably win the overall gold medal count AND they're going to the moon! I for one welcome our new Chinese overlords..
They played under the rules to get the best results. Nothing wrong with it. The competition format is stupid, which should have retained the elimination games from the scratch. The IOC should slap themselves on the face.
The Olympics is supposed to be about the spirit of competition and fair play. Plus, NBA and NFL teams are their own entities. One team tanks for its own benefit and not for the benefit of another team from the same organization. It'd be like the Jets had an A and B team and the one tanks so that they could face one another in the championship or something.
The real question should be asked is, how No.1 and No. 2 seeded pairs, both from China, could face each other before the finals. Now the ones who set the rule decides to blame athletes NOT trying their best to get a negative result?!!! Was there rules regarding "unsportsmanlike action", first warning, second warning, then disqualify? Or all it takes is someone from outside to cry foul on TV? They can come out with fresh sets of rules and just throw out No. 1 seeded athletes to satisfy media? What happened to soccer games like Germany vs Switzerland?
Because they knew Yu/Wang was tanking to be no.2 of Yu/Wang's group, they didn't want to be no.1 of their group to face Yu/Wang in the semi. Had the other Chinese couple beat the Denmark couple, all of these would not have happened. So it's not entirely by design or the rule made it that way. Understandable, but it is just wrong to throw a game like at that level. The entire Wimbley club was booing them, the paying fans.
Umm you would be wrong! China is awarding the first gold medal winner at the game 1.4 million yuan (about $250K) plus 1kg of gold. There are huge incentives to win gold silver etc. This is not just China, just about every country do this. In the US it could sponsor ads.
In one of the matches the umpire stops play and warns them that they can both be disqualified. They must have thought he was bluffing and kept trying to lose.
