IMO, it is fair to assume that players would be able to deal with pressure much better, with the awareness that they are not funded by tax money and hold no responsibilities for the public. Professional/independent players route can only be healthy for the sport, as can be seen by Viktor's recent move to Dubai. The ultrarich in Dubai would want to show off their state-of-the-art sport facilities just for the heck of it, so they would throw money at top athletes to have them train in Dubai. Having more money and exposure can only benefit the sport, especially when badminton has relatively (ridiculously) low prize money compared to other sports like Tennis.
are we supposed to expect our quest to be a professional athlete should not cost anything growing up? pursuing goals from the age of 12 is not free. it's your parents responsibility. how do you know he wouldn't have achieved more? where would borg, mcenroe, federer, nadal, navratilova, serena, steffi graff, tiger woods, etc. be if they had to work for a federation under inequitable rights? would they have even pursued their sports under the current bwf rules? we have no idea. what we do know is those sports are flourishing compared to badminton, and they have far less worldwide participation. it's not about 'what if', it's about 'what's right' for the future... under a 'samkool system' a 12 yr old lzj prodigy would be able to try out for a team, or sign fair short term or long term contract(s) with a team, or seek private coaching, or get recruited/scholarship/grant by a 'team', or do whatever he chooses to do in order make it. a career might consist of starting independent and joining a team later, or starting with a team and going independent later. bam isn't the only federation screwing their athletes. china's internal politics are well known re. coaches favoring certain players. badminton england has the same favoritism problem. same with india. same w/ indonesia. same w/ korea. denmark as well. no major federation is immune to egotistical management. what is allowing the federations to act this way? b.w.f. @kwun if you were a child prodigy which route would you have chosen? right now current players, and future players, have no choice...
https://www.thestar.com.my/sport/ba...-jia-can-bring-up-case-for-arbitration-at-cas Sieh Kok Chi, a long time sports official, says LZJ can bring his case to Court of Arbitration.
that only works if both parties, bam and lzj, agree to let the court arbitrate their case. neither party is obligated to use the court. if someone wants to sue me in the cas i can simply say 'nope'...
It's a shameful action from BAM. BWF stands spineless. For sure it is not Lee's mistake. It is called freedom of choice.
This is not good thinking. National associations are funded to spot, nurture and establish talents. Not to squeeze gratitude and returns from their success stories.
That's not the point. Surrendering your freedom for survival is incorrect. If players don't need their association to register and can independently play, will the associations dissapear? No they will not. The purpose of Associations is to develop sport. Not crush the players.
Your systems are worth considering, but they have their deficiencies too. There has been countless stories of lower ranked players in tennis fighting extremely hard to feed themselves, even in a richer sport like tennis. Imagine what it would be like in badminton. Samkool’s system relies heavily on the willingness of corporate sponsors to fund badminton. Can badminton really get so many corporate sponsors when the popularity of the sport is much more limited than soccer or tennis? It sounds very attractive, but surely there is a reason why badminton and table tennis work with a country-backed model, as compared to the other sports. I don’t know why, maybe someone can give some insights.
IMO , this is a dangerous and definitely not a fair assumption. You can see in many other sports, sports people are subject to internet/reporter attacks. Those people are not publicly funded and have had to take time off …. Naomi Osaka for example.
that's the life of a professional athlete, a life you have chosen. just because you choose to pursue a professional sport does not mean you are entitled to any money/compensation you did not earn by being better than others. athletes know that going in. this applies to many other occupations as well. of course badminton can. however, that's a whole other issue and discussion of how to run and promote a professional global sports enterprise. popularity is not the problem. global participation is in the top 3 of all sports. it's about visibility, and bwf/ibf's failure to escalate badminton's visibility for the good of the sport and athletes for the past 50 years is pathetic. sponsors pay for visibility above all else. i'm not about to type a 250,000 word template on how to elevate badminton's visibility. pick any billion dollar sport and see what changes they have made since 1970. they didn't use a 'samkool system'... all it took was common business sense. they aren't 'working'... they're merely existing. flying under the radar due to lack of visibility.
there's no way in hell bwf would agree to be arbitrated by the court of arbitration of sports. however, bwf is a malaysian company. the players should sue them in a malaysian civil court. that is their best bet. don't know how long it would take, though. i don't see why any badminton athlete, or group of athletes, could not sue them. BWF HQ CONTACT UNIT NO. 1, LEVEL 29 NAZA TOWER PLATINUM PARK NO. 10, PERSIARAN KLCC 50088 KUALA LUMPUR MALAYSIA i would base my legal argument on something like this: "this particular bwf bylaw is absolutely coercive towards athletes worldwide. agreement with the application of this bylaw and its terms is mandatory in order to pursue a career in professional badminton, regardless of your national origin. this bylaw removes the athletes ability to control their own future, health and well being. this rule compels the athletes to submit 100% to their employer. it restricts freedom of movement and freedom of employment. it makes it impossible to direct your own career in the sport of professional competitive badminton internationally, especially due to the absence of any other opportunity or alternative outlet to do so." (add monopoly powers argument) lzj & gjw should get their sponsors to help them with this. if i were an int'l or malaysian lawyer i'd pro bono this case.
Do you remember the scoring issue when they tried to reduce mixed doubles to 11 points from 15 points under the old scoring system. I think that went to CAS.
