IBF 2006 Calendar - Some thoughts

Discussion in '2006 Tournaments' started by Loh, Feb 12, 2006.

  1. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    21,081
    Likes Received:
    2,869
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    Seven, this is actually a very old argument. Many people before taneepak have pointed out this out (not on BF) and is not restricted to badminton. The UK atheletes in the Olympics actually compete under a UK flag. I don't think racism is a basis for this particular point.

    Football is another example of seperation. Some people in UK do discuss about a combined team. Such a team could potentially be world beaters rather than perenial losers!
     
  2. seven

    seven New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Computing Engineer
    Location:
    Toulouse, France
    I talk about racism because Taneepak is constantly attacking the number of votes european - or occidental - badminton federations have. (whether UK or not)

    He seems to want badminton to be an all-asian affair (which it almost already is) which would obviously be very bad for its olympic status and its development. (IBF has already sufficiently made a fool of itself in front of IOC)

    I don't think it is very good either to defend the - very capitalist - idea that the richest federations should get the most votes, rather than votes being given depending on their number of players.
     
  3. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    22
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    No, I am not trying to defend anything, neither do I want badminton to be an all-Asian affair, nor am I advocating that the richest federations should get the most votes.
    The facts are that the IBF started off with the centre of power concentrated in just one country, England, then the UK, even during the periods when badminton was completely dominated by Indonesia, Denmark and Malaysia. There were also procedural rules that effectively made the votes of Malaysia and Indonesia totally useless at that time. Even with the entry of China and the emergence of Korea the voting rights were still too one sided. Today's voting rights are still not fair. They are a compromise, keeping some of the old 'unfair' voting rights and allowing some concessions to third world countries new to badminton to have one vote.
    Now what is so unfair about letting everyone know the actual votes each country has? I think it is good to know about the history of the IBF and why the votes are what they are. At least it explains the 'political' nature of the IBF.
     
  4. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    22
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    The USA was a great badminton nation in the 1950s, reaching the qualifying finals and even the Challenge round. As the new preident of the IBF says, the IBF retains a bit of the old tradition.
     
  5. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    22
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Ireland should thank their Plunkett-Dillon, who led a 'rebellion' of Ireland, Scotland, and Wales against the English, in the early years of the IBF for their privileged votes. Again it is a political compromise to retain a little of the old traditions.
    BTW, the founding members were the 4 Home Countries, England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and Denmark, Canada, Netherlands, New Zealand and France. With the exception of New Zealand the founding countries either retain or increase their voting rights. NZ was probably too far away and the procedural rule that no proxy vote was allowed did not help.
     
  6. seven

    seven New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Computing Engineer
    Location:
    Toulouse, France
    What is all this crap about rebellion against the English??? :confused:
    Ireland is NOT even in the UK!!

    Scotland and Wales have separate federations, which as Cheung pointed out, means they have a weaker team (for TUC and SC for ex) than if it were UK.

    These countries simply have votes related to their number of (registered) players, same as the others.
     
  7. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    22
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    The founding members were England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland (then known as the Home Countries), Denmark, Canada, France, New Zealand, Netherlands. The first IBF had 13 members in the Executive Committee, seven were English, four from the other 'Home Countries', and only two came from outside the UK. That was in 1934.
    India was the first outside county to join, in 1935.
     
  8. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    22
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    You can get a glympse of how the IBF operated in the early 1960s by visiting the Professional Players forum and look for a thread 'Dr. Oon Chong Teik : The Memoirs of an Extraordinary Sportsman'. Or you can go directly to www. viweb.freehosting.net/OonCT.htm and scroll down to the piece 'On the IBF Council'. The situation before 1960 was no better. Or if you have an old copy of the Guinness Book of Badminton, you will find interesting reading about the 'gang of 3' from the 'Home Countries' rebelling and demanding to be 'given the Key'. England caved in but still managed to have more seats on the Council than the rest of the world plus the 3 rebels combined.
     

Share This Page