Who Moved My Singapore Cheese

As a former badminton player in the inter-school circuit, I found it rather surprising when I saw the contenders for the title this year, RJC vs Jurong JC. What? JJC? What happened to VJC? Or ACJC? Or even TJC? Well the twist of story came to light when I managed to track down my former doubles partner at the badminton hall amidst the good old deafening RJC cheering. He is one of the teachers-in-charge now and the inside scoop is this...

Me: How come JJ is so strong now?
Him: They are all Chinese import students/players.
Me: Where do they find so many Chinese players?
Him: They have agents for that nowadays apparently...
Me: Then how can they cope with 'A' levels just coming into Singapore like dat?
Him: They don't. Their school don't care. They return to their country or find other things to do after the 2yrs in JC.

For a more informative read, below is a better documented article taken from the Kent Ridge Common.
Some really 'funny' comments also ensued the article...of which I extracted one...see below!

Warning signs of unhappy sentiments against foreigners
By Kelvin Teo ⋅ June 2, 2009

SINGAPORE - Last week, the National Inter-school ‘A’ division badminton finals featured a showdown between Jurong Junior College (JJC) and Raffles Institution (RJC). What was supposed to be a simple final duel between 2 schools ended up being polarized into a Singapore versus China showdown. How did that happen? The boys’ and girls’ teams from RJC consisted of Singaporeans, while the girls’ team line-up from JJC wholly consisted of Chinese nationals. Of the 7 members in the JJC boys’ team, 4 were from China, 1 from South Korea and 2 were Singaporeans.

JJC made history with its first appearance in a badminton final. However, the line-up of its teams came under heavy criticism, and there were hints of unhappy sentiments. Vice-captain of the Anglo-Chinese Junior College (ACJC) badminton team, John Low, echoed the sentiments of his team:”‘It’s unfair and we do feel a little resentful.” RJC coach Hamid Khan agreed with Low’s unfair assessment, adding that there should have been a cap in the number of foreign players allowed to participate. Others felt that a cap in number of foreign players would have the advantage of improving sporting standards without adversely affecting the participation of local players. The polarized contest between Singapore and China was summed up by Lim Boon Tiong, an RJC reserve player:”A lot of us feel like we’re playing for Singapore, not just Raffles”.

The resentment went to the level that even supporters from ACJC cheered on RJC. This is a thought that any ACSian in his right frame of mind would never ever entertain given the rivalry between ACS and Raffles. The fact that the former cheered for the latter just showed how polarized the contest is, which transcended inter-school rivalries.

Such unhappy sentiments were reminiscent of those expressed in the wake of the open door policy, which opened the floodgates for waves of foreign employees into our work force. These sentiments were expressed occasionally in our very own Straits Times forums, and online in blogs and other popular Internet forums. Like those who were concerned over the badminton showdown between JJC and RJC, there were repeated calls to exercise a strict cap or quota on the number of foreign employees a company can hire. Like local badminton players losing out on the opportunity to represent their school, local employees fear losing their rice bowls to foreign employees. If the calls remained unheeded, such unhappy sentiments against foreigners will rear its ugly head. The events at the badminton final provided a stark reminder to all.


Comment
nsnsns · 9 hours ago
Wake up, the Singapore male will eventually lose in the game of life when you finish your A-levels and are forced to enter NS slavery. The "JJC China loser" will move on to your varsity place and fuck your girls. I hope something ugly breaks up at a larger scale. It will be a much better show than this childish badminton.