The mysterious fragility of super-fit shuttlers

Wang Yihan of China, who retired from the Korea Open Super Series.

Three top Chinese players and one doubles pair retired yesterday in first-round action at the season-opening Korea Open Super Series Premier.

For those who have been following the sport, the unusual number of retirements – all ostensibly due to injury – was not surprising. Compared to what happened at the Olympics, these are minor occurrences.

These are strange times for badminton. At the lower end of the spectrum, one gets to see thousands of children taking up the sport (in India, at least), and their parents spending hundreds of thousands of rupees and valuable time in trying to get their children to play nationally and internationally. At the opposite end – the international level – you often see players who do not want to play, or sometimes playing without any intention of winning. The official reason given, when they don’t complete their matches, is injury. But of course. What else could it be?

There has been a lot of focus on China, but that’s only because they are so dominant. One doesn’t expect anything less than a Chinese victory every time they take to court. During all-China matches (as with all-Indonesia matches in earlier times), scepticism often clouds enjoyment of the action. When Rudy Hartono won the 1980 World Championships in Jakarta over his younger compatriot Liem Swie King, many observers wrote that King had played way below his potential – meaning that he was possibly instructed to do so, to enable Hartono to win the one crown he did not have.

The Chinese have their defenders, and their views cannot be dismissed. One line of argument is that the top players are playing tournaments throughout the year, and deserve an extended break. Of the 12 Superseries, the top players are compulsorily required to play five (the ‘Premier’ Superseries: Korea, All England, Indonesia, Denmark, China). Contrast this with tennis: Roger Federer will play 14 tournaments this year. A badminton event lasts less than a week, compared to a fortnight for a Grand Slam. How can a top badminton player complain of a hectic schedule if he has only five compulsory events lined up over 12 months?

Li Xuerui, another retirement at the Korea Super Series.

Another argument is that our cultural moorings prejudice our judgements – for what is acceptable in their culture might not be to ours. One often heard this line of defence during the Olympics. What was wrong, the argument went, for a country to ensure its best representation in the later rounds if it meant playing below potential in the group matches? The counter-argument is that a sport must be played in the best spirit, otherwise it is devalued.

There have been seven Superseries since the Olympics, out of which three were Premier – meaning participation of top players was compulsory. Of the seven, the top Chinese skipped the Japan Open, French Open and turned in indifferent performances at Denmark and Korea. (It’s a different matter that their second-rung is also good enough to win titles). Are these half-hearted appearances the Chinese’s way of making a statement, possibly in the wake of the disqualification of their top doubles team during the Olympics? Or is this about conflict over sponsorship? As one well-travelled commentator put it on his Facebook page: ‘It’s also a way of saying… want to play with us? Sure. We can play dumb too. Look.’

All those concerned about the sport would do well to remember that badminton took some big blows in 2012. The farce that played midway through the Olympics is still fresh in people’s minds. After the Olympics, the Chinese withdrew from the Japan Open, citing a border row with that country. At the Denmark Open, there were again some notable upsets in the early rounds, and four of their Olympic medallists lost on semifinals day. Now, at the Korea Open, we’ve seen four top contenders retire early in their opening round matches. Surely, they cannot claim to be overworked at the beginning of the season?

For my part, I have decided to ignore all instances of players throwing matches or retiring even when they are obviously fit. We will give them the benefit of doubt and assume they played poorly or were injured. If they behave as if they don’t need the sport, the sport doesn’t need them either. I’d rather see competitive action between less accomplished players in the later rounds, than be subject to a circus of under-performance. (I’m still miffed about the 2008 All England final, when Lin Dan mysteriously developed knee trouble in the second game against his compatriot Chen Jin – thereby helping him qualify for the 2008 Beijing Olympics.) Most of the top Chinese skipped the French Open, and that was perhaps just as well, for we did have a competitive final between Viktor Axelsen and Daren Liew. Not the two greatest players at the moment, but a match on the level, and ultimately, that’s the most important thing in sport.