NZ Olympic Soccer Team Accuse CAN Team of UAV Spying

[The Bread Guy]

Reads to me like the funding is tied to the specific individuals. So get new staff I guess?

Well, if that specific coach isn't allowed to coach for a year, makes sense.

 

[brihard]

Well, if that specific coach isn't allowed to coach for a year, makes sense.

No reason the government should pay for someone who’s suspended and cannot do the job the government provided funding for.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Makes sense now....

 

[Brad Sallows]

It’s a team sport, and any uncompetitive advantages gained by the team’s staff cheating advantages the team as a whole. A meaningful deterrent has to therefore remove the incentive of greater team success, and that can only be done by a punishment that harm’s the overall team’s standings- pour encourages les autres. Nothing unusual or inappropriate about this in a team sports context, and the integrity of the sport demands nothing less.

Sucks that it’s our crew this time round, but it is what it is.

It's a platoon, and any tactical advantages gained by the platoon commander or 2I/C violating a law or custom of war advantages the platoon as a whole. It's a business, and any competitive advantage gained by the executives violating competition law advantages the employees as a whole.

Not buying it.

 

[brihard]

It's a platoon, and any tactical advantages gained by the platoon commander or 2I/C violating a law or custom of war advantages the platoon as a whole. It's a business, and any competitive advantage gained by the executives violating competition law advantages the employees as a whole.

Not buying it.

It’s competitive sport. Your analogy is garbage and you know it.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Makes sense now....View attachment 86914

Glass 1/2 full me: nothing to see here, a coach should be able to drone their own team while training to get a better big picture when needed.

Glass 1/2 empty me: I wonder if that's related to this quote from the Minister in the above article?

 

[Brad Sallows]

It’s competitive sport. Your analogy is garbage and you know it.

Good counter-argument.

Either the principle of eschewing collective punishment means people not responsible don't suffer strong direct consequences, or it doesn't. The venue shouldn't matter.

A company can pay an anti-competitive fine or settlement and that will impact owners/shareholders and employees at the margins, but they don't have to wait four years for another opportunity.

 

[brihard]

Good counter-argument.

Either the principle of eschewing collective punishment means people not responsible don't suffer strong direct consequences, or it doesn't. The venue shouldn't matter.

A company can pay an anti-competitive fine or settlement and that will impact owners/shareholders and employees at the margins, but they don't have to wait four years for another opportunity.

The Canadian team is still in and could still possibly advance if they REALLY rock it, but the cheating, once caught, placed them at a *dis*advantage specifically to disincentivize and deter. The whole premise of team sports, unlike business or war, is to place all competitors on as level a playing field as possible. A punishment to anticompetitive behaviour that is levied against the short term competitive of the team in the tournament they cheated in is entirely rational. The team itself is the relevant actor here. This sends a sharp message to all teams to keep a grip on their total players and staff, and to make the expectations of fair play clear. This is not business, it’s not war, it’s not criminal law- the collective sanction is appropriate for the forum. And, more to the point, it’s part of the regulatory schema of the associations and competitions all of the players and their teams voluntarily choose to participate in. This was cheating intended to benefit the team, so the team faces a penalty for it, on top of the individual(s) directly involved losing their jobs.