It’s in the news again, match fixing and this time, in badminton.  It’s not the sort of match fixing where referees in Southern Europe are bribed, but the above-board kind where it influences who you play in the next round.

Playing to lose, to be crowned the best?

A number of Asian badminton doubles players have been disqualified from the Olympics because if they lose their final preliminary game, it could increase their respective country’s chances at winning more medals as they can have more than one pair competing in the same tournament.  This begs the question; why have a competition format where such a flaw can be exposed?

Supposedly, it got on the spectators’ tits watching both pairs trying to lose.  It’s a game of badminton for crying out loud, a controversial badminton moment never existed until now.  The sport’s dull enough as it is so savour the moment, say “I was there”, it’s going to be a game that will stand out and live long in the memory.

I’d rather watch the World Tiddlywinks Championship.

I’m not an avid follower of the old shuttlecock sports (or most Olympic events actually) but if it’s doubles then surely it’s a team game, you don’t see two USA relay teams down by the pool so why should this be different?  For the relay, the whole team consists of more than four swimmers, they get swapped round for each heat and they all get medals if they do well, badminton should be the same.  Swap players around every now and then, let the same countries compete with each other rather than against each other, stop them systematically trying to get more medals for themselves and possibly give others a chance.

You shouldn’t be punished if you find a loop-hole in the rulebook and exploit it, just as long as you abide by it.  The only ones who should be punished are those who set out the rules.  Jose Mourinho and Real Madrid, a couple of seasons back, were initially punished by UEFA for getting his players with yellow cards sent off during the Champions League group stage — in which they were already assured first place — so those players were suspended for a game they could lose and have a clean slate for the knock-out rounds.  There’s nothing wrong with that, all I see was that UEFA were undone by sheer genius, left red-faced and retaliated bitterly.

Senhor Clever Clogs

Ten years or so ago now, a football team in Madagascar deliberately scored 149 own goals in protest to a refereeing decision in an earlier game.  They were heavily punished for “unsportsmanship” but they didn’t break any rules.  Reports are sketchy but I’m sure they turned up, fielded 11 players who were all eligible to play, didn’t try to deceive the officials, followed management’s instructions and abided by the laws of the game for the whole 90 minutes.  I just think at any whiff of controversy, a higher authority has to stamp their mark on proceedings when it really is unnecessary.

A much worse case has took place in the Premier League a couple of times, by Wolverhampton Wanderers and Blackpool, in the space of a year between February 2010 and January 2011, respectively.  Both teams were fined for fielding weakened teams, despite all players being eligible.  What the fuck is wrong with fielding a weakened team?  Big teams do it at the end of the season when there’s nothing to play for, give the reserves and fringe players a runabout.  League chairman Richard Scudamore is a fascist and doesn’t care about the sport, only his juicy pay cheque which most would envy.

The “spirit of the game” is nothing more than a pile of toss, there’s nothing wrong with playing by the rules.