skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I can still remember those innocent days of childhood, and the ever important "What's for dinner?" conversations with my mom. Today I'm especially thinking of a recurring conversation that I really never wanted to have back in the day. "What are we having for dinner?" "Leftovers." "Awwww, do we have to?"Oh, how time has changed my perspective. Well, time, and a change of scenery. I suppose my feelings about leftovers vary based on the alternatives I consider viable at the time. When I was a kid living at home, I only considered two viable options - leftovers, or Mom cooking a fresh meal. Allowing for only those two choices, of course leftovers came across as highly disappointing. Of course, even then, there were always a number of alternatives I never considered at the time - making my own meal, not eating at all, etc. So even back then, leftovers of good homemade meals should have been relatively high on the list, but in my mind, it was 2nd on a list of 2.Now, as I'm out on my own, and have been for many years, all of the other alternatives are much closer to the front of my mind. The result is that today, knowing that I have chicken fajitas leftover from Wednesday to come home to for supper is a reason to be pleased about the evening meal. It's not quite as good as having fresh made fajitas like I did on Wednesday, but it's way better than cracking open a box of mac and cheese, a Hot pocket, or a frozen pizza, involves much less time and effort than cooking something new myself, and costs a heck of a lot less than going out to eat. Heck, tonight I even made a point of controlling my portions in order to make sure I'd have enough left for a full meal tomorrow!You see, since it's just me, when I cook, I generally get at least 4 dinners out of it, often more. I could cut the recipes down, but that would just mean I have to cook (and clean up, which is the part I actually don't like) more often. So, I have to make sure I make stuff that I really like, and I have to have enough different things to make that I don't get sick of certain dishes over time. Thus far it's worked out quite well, but if you had told 12 year old me that a day would come when having leftovers for dinner would be a very good thing, he'd have laughed at you. It's just amazing how quickly your perspective can shift on something like this.
Okay, so I'm a day late on this one, but I never got around to blogging yesterday amongst a number of other tasks I had to take care of, and I just couldn't let this one go.You hear the whispers around other sports, but no other pro sports league deals with the undercurrent suggestion that it tries to influence outcomes to the extent that the NBA does. There's a variety of reasons for that, but my opinion is that the primary reason is that they've created a very difficult game to officiate, and they don't have enough particularly good officiating. This allows inconsistencies to abound, and at critical moments.Anyhow, it's been quite en vogue this year to suggest that the NBA is doing it's best to orchestrate a Lakers/Celtics matchup in the Finals. There's a number of reasons why that sentiment is running so strong with the conspiracy theorists. First of all, this is the first season since it was revealed that former referee Tim Donaghee was actually involved in a gambling scandal to fix games, so the league's credibility has been at the forefront all season and the idea of game fixing is much more believable to even the average fan. Secondly, the Lakers and Celtics both benefited from what have been seen as incredibly lopsided deals for star players, from teams with management that has ties to them - Jerry West and the Grizzlies shipping Pau Gasol to the Lakers, and Kevin McHale and Minnesota dumping Kevin Garnett in Boston's lap. Finally, there's simple fact of the level of appeal that glamour matchup has to the league, and if you're willing to believe the league would influence outcomes, this is clearly one that that would offer significant temptation to doing so.Let me be clear here - despite David Stern's repeated refusal to answer the question, it's patently obvious that the league is dying for the LA/Boston matchup. The regular season sparked interest in the NBA to a level it hasn't seen in quite a while, and what better way to cap that off with a Finals matchup that would harken back to the glory days of the late 80s, matching two of the league's marquee franchises and a number of marquee stars in a renewal of a rivalry that dominated the game back when the NBA was near/at its peak.Anyhow, the league is now 1 victory from each team away from getting its unstated, but still evident, wish. The Lakers lead their Western Conference Final 3 games to 1 over the Spurs, and the Celtics are up 3 to 2 over the Pistons in the East. And it is the last game of the Lakers/Spurs series that has the conspiracy theorists chomping at the bit. For the uninformed, the Lakers won that game by 2 points. On the last play of the game, Spur Brent Barry got the ball above the 3 point line and put a pump fake on his defender, Derek Fisher, which Fisher bit on. Fisher went airborne and came down on Barry with a significant level of contact. Barry then proceeded to continue on and attempt, and miss, a game winning 3. No foul was called despite the clear contact, and so instead of Barry going to the line with a chance to tie the game, the game ended as a Spurs loss, and the conspiracy theorists went wild.If that was all you knew, or all of the game you watched, you might be able to buy into a conspiracy theory. However, context, and in fact immediate context, makes the idea laughable. If the refs were in LA's corner, then Derek Fisher's shot with 5.1 seconds left on the clock that hit the rim before being knocked out of bounds by the Spurs would have been ruled to have hit the rim, and the Lakers would have been inbounding with a full shot clock and up by 2, forcing the Spurs to foul. That didn't happen, and the Lakers instead had to rush a shot which they missed, given the Spurs the shot at the last possession, still down only two. If the refs were favoring LA, Lamar Odom's clean block just before that sequence would have been ruled a clean block, and not a goaltend. If the refs were helping LA's cause, Kobe Bryant, who averaged 9 free throw attempts a game in the regular season and over 13 a game in the first 2 rounds of the playoffs, wouldn't have been able to take 29 shots in the game without attempting a single free throw.I'm obviously not a conspiracy theorist, as you can tell, but I don't totally mind this kind of talk, as long as can at least pretend to be justifiable. In this case, it just doesn't hold up, at all. If you assume a referee (and therefore a league) agenda in this game, you'd have to assume they were working for the Spurs up until the last play of the game, at which point they made an about face.The real problem here is the combination of poor officiating and this bogus idea that the refs shouldn't "decide" the game with a foul call at crunch time. While the league has insisted for years that a foul in the first minute should be a foul in the last minute, that's clearly not the way things operate. And that's a problem, from my perspective. If you have good referees who are calling the game correctly, then the referee doesn't decide the game by calling a foul, the fouling player does by committing one. The only thing anyone should fear coming in the last minute (or at any point in the game) is an incorrect call. And yet, here we are. And because we have a media that largely doesn't appreciate context, we get talk about how the Spurs got jobbed (because their bad call was the last one, mind you, not the only one), and I have to listen to Jeff Van Gundy explain to me why it was the right call because fouls should be different in the last minute of the game. That's a joke, and that kind of attitude ensures that we're going to be having this same basic conversation pretty much every postseason. Call the game well and consistently throughout, and these problems by in large go away.
I know I said it was going to be a few weeks before I got to continue investigating the case of the missing bus. Well... weeks and days really aren't THAT different, are they?Anyhow, I was planning to work late every day this week to make up some time from the Memorial Day holiday and my non-paid time off situation. However, with a softball game and a meeting for our Thailand team looming tonight, and the threat of inclement weather meaning the potential for lots of phone calls regarding the softball game, I decided it would be worth my while to be at home at the normal time, if possible. So, I decided to take a shot at catching the 3:25 bus, with the understanding that if it got to be much past 3:35, I was going to head back upstairs and log another half hour of work. I did make a point of being there pretty early anyhow, and wound up waiting at like 3:18. To my joy, the bus showed up at it's old normal time, just before 3:30, and I happily boarded and rode home.In the interim between my last unsuccessful attempt at catching the 3:25 and today, I had an experience which allowed me to form a theory as to the fate of the missing bus on the previous days. There was a bus driver I hadn't seen on the 4:10 bus last Friday. If you read my blog entry from Friday night, you might remember my comment about not wanting to hear your bus driver say we have to loop back through downtown Harrisburg because she screwed the route up. Well, that was the incident. The unfamiliar driver failed to make a turn on the route, and would have completely missed an important pickup had her passengers not reminded her.Well, here's the thing. Anytime I've gotten on the 3:25 bus, me and anyone boarding with me at my stop have been the first ones on the bus. There's construction going on in the Capitol Complex, and the street that runs between the Capitol and my office is shutdown between 7th and Commonwealth. The normal route calls for the bus to come down that street from 7th to Commonwealth, but since that's not possible, the bus has been turning one block earlier and coming down Forster before turning onto Commonwealth. My theory is that there was a substitute bus driver las week who, instead of coming down a block early via Forster, came down a block late via South, and with no one on the bus to correct them, never realized the mistake.So, there you have it, a mystery solved, sort of. I know it's not Sherlock Holmes or anything like that, but I'm just glad my bus was there for me today.
Yesterday I finished Glory Road, the autobiography of Hall of Fame Texas Western/UTEP college basketball coach Don Haskins. Haskins had a long and storied coaching career, but he is most well known for something that happened very early in his career - winning the 1966 national championship. Now, that wouldn't necessarily be particularly noteworthy, except for the composition of Haskin's team. Texas Western was the first team to start 5 African-American players, and the first to win a national championship with 5 black starters.A couple things stuck out to me in this book. First of all, I really like Don Haskins, at least as he's presented in this book. He comes across as ridiculously grounded, practical, and down to earth. He's also a bit ornery, to say the least. Now, obviously I get a pretty one-sided view from his telling of the story, but he really seems to me like a coach who did it "the right way", and was truly concerned and interested in his players. I can't help but respect a guy who is a Hall of Famer and probably could have gone just about anywhere he wanted to throughout his career, and yet spent his entire career in relative obscurity in El Paso, Texas. He also shares my healthy level of cynicism for the NCAA (in fact, he's probably more cynical, which doesn't surprise me given his personality and the front seat view he had all these years), and I find that appealing as well.Secondly, reading Haskins' account of his team and that 1966 season, I really had to bristle at some of my memories of watching the movie version that Disney made. Now, I expect movie makers to take a few liberties with stories for the sake of the drama of the movie, but it doesn't necessarily bother me any less when they do. In the movie, prior to the national title game, Haskins announces to his team that he's only going to play the 7 black players, and basically that he's doing it to let them prove a point, to make their mark. I had a feeling watching the movie that that was bogus, and the book confirmed that in spades. First of all, the 1966 championship game was not the first time Haskins started all African-Americans. And secondly, while I believe Haskins was more conscious of the social ramification than he would like to let on, it seems pretty clear to me that he was really only trying to win basketball games, and that it wouldn't have occurred to him to do anything but start his best players. Due to his own background, the various stereotypes regarding black players just didn't ring true. I really think doing the scene that way was just lazy movie-making, because it was much easier to bring the drama to a climax that way then it actually played out.Further, I was very fascinated to learn just how bad the fallout was for Haskins and Texas Western after that title game. We look back on it now as this great, enduring, watershed moment in college basketball history, and it certainly is. However, it wasn't all glory for Haskins and Texas Western, and Haskins said that for years he wished that they hadn't won the championship because of all the problems it brought. There was hate mail and a backlash from the basketball establishment. Sports Illustrated wrote an article talking about how Haskins exploited African-American players who had no business being in school and couldn't make the grades. Haskins listed where all the players from that team are today, let's just say it makes that assertion pretty laughable. Like most all of Haskins' players throughout his career, that championship team graduated. I think that will make me pause a little bit the next time I read (or prepare to write myself) that kind of accusation. I'm not saying that it's not a fair accusation in many cases, I'm just thinking now that it's the easy story and merits more investigation.Anyhow, next in my readings will be Tobacco Road, by Alwyn Featherson, which chronicles the history of the big-time college basketball rivalries in the state of North Carolina between Duke, UNC, NC State, and Wake Forest.
Been awhile since I bragged on Messiah athletics, but it's time once again! Back in March, after the women's basketball team had lost in the national title game, I reflected on the incredible success Messiah athletics has seen since 2000. Well, we can add another individual national champion to that list! Messiah senior Amy Reed, who was actually a member of that national runner-up basketball team, has won the heptahalon at the 2008 D-III Track and Field championships, following up on her runner-up performance from last year. Furthermore, Amy's 5111 points in the event were an NCAA Championships meet record, eclipsing the previous record by almost 100 points. Amy's effort proved that the US Track and Field and Cross Country Coaches' Association got it right when they named her the NCAA D-III Female Athlete of the year. And Amy's meet is not done, as she also qualified for the javelin and the triple jump, which are today. She's seeded 3rd in the javelin, meaning she's a legitimate threat for a second title at the meet. Here's hoping!And while I'm talking about all of this as the spring athletics season wraps up, I have to acknowledge both Messiah's men's tennis team and the baseball team. Both teams won their conference championships and advanced to the NCAA tournament. It was the tennis team's 2nd appearance ever, and the baseball team's 3rd. The tennis team was defeated in their first round match, while the baseball team won their first game before losing two straight to be eliminated from their regional tournament.While this was the first year in a few that Messiah didn't win a team national championship, and it's hard to forget the 2005-2006 year when both soccer teams won titles, 2007-2008 may rank as the best ever year for Falcon athletics as a whole. I'll have to do a little research and ponder that particular matter for a while!
One of my "resolutions" for this year was to get a better grip on my personal finances. And I have to admit, that's one of the ones I've done pretty poorly at thus far. At the beginning of the month, we had a special two week series on personal finances at church, which I thought was very good. It was taught by the man who has been our pastor's "coach" as we've launched this new congregation at McBIC that we call CrossWalk. He's not a professional financial guru, he's just a guy who has had his finances get the best of him, and then worked his way out of it through discipline and dedication. He mainly talked a lot of common sense, which is often very lacking in how Americans handle their money.Anyhow, in a lot of ways, I was not someone who was a key target audience for much of his message. Much of it centered around getting out from under debt and the like, and really, that's never been an issue for me. I don't pretend to be a financial expert, but one thing I've always prioritized is living within my means and not spending more than I have. That's left me in excellent relative to the average American. I have zero credit card debt, and in fact no consumer debt of any kind. I have my school loans, which thanks to record low interest rates when I graduated and consolidated, and the rate cut I got as a result of making my first 4 years of payments in time, are now at 2% interest. I also have my mortgage, and thanks to the amount of sweat I put into the house on the front end, I have a fair amount of equity in the home, given that I'm only 3 years into the mortgage. So, all told, I have a positive net worth, which is nice.
Where I have faltered on the financial front is in savings. I'm in a very good place now, but if I found myself out of work for more than a few weeks, or had an extended health issue, I'd likely be left with little choice but to run into a good bit of debt. And so that has been my motivation to really work on my finances. That work has jumped even higher on the priority list in the last several weeks, as I'm facing the possibility of going from 2 roommates to 0 roommates, at least for a period of time, in July. Additionally, I work on contract and don't have any guarantees regarding my job past mid-October.
So, I made a few immediate resolutions. I just got a raise at work. Now, this isn't anything massive, just your standard annual inflationary type raise. However, if I can couple that raise with a few meaningful reductions in my spending, I could develop some very meaningful margin in the budget. So, the first thing I did was look at things I could easily cut and barely notice. Surprisingly, there was at least 100 dollars a month available right there, although some of them I can't do right away due to contracts and so forth. I was very fortunate to be just finishing up my cell phone contract last month, so I used that opportunity to change providers and move onto my family's share plan, where I'll just be paying for the extra line and a little bit to cover my share of the minutes. So right there, I got a savings of 40 dollars a month that I won't miss at all. Other things on the docket include a reduction in my TV package (appropriate since I'm watching less TV anyhow), and a cut back in some online sports games I play.
In addition to reduction in those "fixed" monthly costs, I wanted to cut back on some of my unnecessary day to day spending. First up on the docket was fast food and other kinds of non-grocery food expenses. I've been saying I want to cut back on that stuff for quite a while, but it's really hard to do anything concrete about that since it's cash spending, especially it's just me and I don't really have anyone else looking at my spending. So, I resolved to do something that I'd heard about many times but said "Nah, I don't need to do that." I determined how much I was going to allow myself to spend on that sort of thing in a month, and I put that much cash in an envelope in my wallet. When the envelope is empty, I'm done for the month. I was even really good about this, because I started about 4 into the month, and I deducted the 22 bucks I had spent on this sort of stuff over the week before. Anyhow, like I said, I'd spent about 22 dollars on this sort of stuff in first several days of the month. From over the next 19 days, I spent 8 dollars. It's absolutely incredible how easy it is to do without that sort of stuff when you give yourself a reason to think about it. There were probably weeks prior to this month where I would have spent 8 bucks in the week just on snacks and drinks while at the office. Anyhow, last night's get together cleaned me out with a week to go in the month, but I'm okay with that because a) last night was a special occasion, b) I know I wouldn't have spent the original 22 dollars if I had been doing this all month, and c) it gives me a good and immediate test to see how I'll handle being in this situation.
My goal is to eventually increase the amount of cash in the envelope and use it to cover all incidentals, recreation, leisure and such for the month, leaving the credit card only for "essentials" like gas and groceries. However, I started small because I know me, and if I go too aggressive too quickly, I'll give it up and be back to square one. Better a successful baby step than a failed leap, I say!
#1 - The new softball glove made it's debut last night, to mixed reviews. Of course, a brand new baseball glove offers similar difficulties to those of a too old glove, though for difference reasons. I think I've done about as good a job as I can of softening the glove up prior to game action, but there's only so much I can do, so it's still got some stiffness to it. I had another over the shoulder, back to the infield catch, and of course, it popped out of the glove. This one wasn't quite so dramatic, because it rolled back down into my body, and I basically knelt down and held it in my lap. But I've got to keep these balls in the glove. The umpire really can't see what's happening in these situations, and one of these times they're going to see the ball leave the glove and just assume I dropped it.#2 - Since I left work early yesterday, I took the later bus today, as I mentioned yesterday, avoiding the mystery of the missing 3:25 bus. Anyhow, there was a different driver on the 4:10 bus than I'd seen before. There are a couple things you don't want to hear when you're on a bus (already later than usual) on your way home for a long weekend. One of them is your bus driver realizing she screwed up the route and announcing that we have to loop back through downtown Harrisburg at rush hour. Another is her explaining that the reason she made the mistake was that she was so concerned about the bus because "the fast idle is broken and if we idle long enough, the bus will shutoff". Fortunately, the bus never shut down, and I made it home safely, though a bit later than expected.#3 - Sitting at a traffic light for a split second after it turns because you were fiddling around with your GPS might merit a little alert honk from the person behind you. What it does not merit is said person behind you flipping you off repeated while mimicking your GPS fiddling motion for about half a mile down the road. For the record, Mr. Trucker with an obvious anger management problem, I was on the gas before you even beeped. Seriously, I actually saw the light change and couldn't have hesitated more than a half second. There was traffic on the other side of the intersection and I was well into the intersection before the first car went by on the other side.#4 - They few things in life that are better than spending a Friday dinner with a bunch of your good friends, eating, talking, and laughing. Of course, it does mitigate the joy some when the occasion for the gathering is that one of the friends is moving away, but it was still an awesome evening, that was topped off by a drive towards an absolutely beautiful sunset on the way home. There are some parts of creation that man will never be able to screw up!
So, I didn't get to blog about this yesterday, but public transportation struck yet another blow! After Tuesday's fiasco, I, of course, showed up at the bus stop earlier than previously. I was there at about 3:20, and the route isn't supposed to start until 3:25. And once again, no bus! Well, I can't say for sure no bus, because I didn't wait outside as long this time. It was cool again, and this time actually raining, so when 3:45 rolled around (10-15 minutes later than I've ever been picked up before), I went into the lobby of my building to sit and read before going back out to wait for the 4:10 bus, which, predictably arrived at around 4:15.So, seriously, who kidnapped the 3:25 bus? I have no clue what might have played out again today, as I left work early to deal with the question of whether or not we could play our softball game tonight (the answer is yes, but not at the scheduled field. Moving a game is much more irritating than having one rained out, but at least you get to play the game), so I took the 2:25 bus instead, which, much like the 4:10 has done the last two days, and much like the 3:25 did every day prior to Tuesday, arrived at my bus stop about 5 minutes after the scheduled start of the route. The public transportation website indicates no change in route or times in the last month, and yet suddenly I'm uncapable of picking up the bus to New Cumberland at approximately 3:30 just outside my building. Strange indeed.This is a great mystery, but one that I will not have the opportunity to investigate further for quite a while, and by the time I have a chance, it will hopefully solve itself. Since I left early today, I'll be staying late tomorrow, and since next week is a holiday week and I don't get paid time off as a consultant, I'll be working each night to make up some of that time. The following week will be a short week for me as well, as I leave for Thailand on Friday the 6th, I'll be in Thailand for the entire next week, and then returning during the day on Monday, so the week after that will be short as well. So, if I'm still working on this assignment on Monday, June 23rd, I'll report in as to what I find!
So, I've been doing the bus thing for work for a little over a week now. It's really been an overall pleasant experience. I like being able to just sit back, relax, and read, and get dropped off right next to my building in the morning. I don't have a particularly long commute, but driving into the Harrisburg can still be pretty annoying at times, even at 6:45 am, and I like that I no longer have to deal with that stress. I just drive into New Cumberland, park on a side street, wait a few minutes, hop on the bus, and then 15 minutes or so later, I'm at work. And then I reverse the process in the afternoon. Overall, commuting probably takes me an extra 20-25 minutes this way. However, were I not doing the bus, I'd probably be spending at least 10-15 of those minutes walking from my parking lot to my office, and besides, I don't really see that time as lost, since I'm generally doing some reading that I'd be doing in the evening at home anyhow. I would be rethinking my views on mass transit, if I had anything against mass transit, which I don't. I have something against the fact that my money currently funds mass transit in Pittsburgh (which I have never used) and in Philly (which I recall maybe using once). And it was funding mass transit in Harrisburg long before I ever actually bought a bus pass.Today, however, I had my first negative bus experience. As you either know, or at least assume, buses run on a schedule. Or at least they are supposed to. It's how the system works. The bus from downtown Harrisburg to New Cumberland runs about 6 times in the afternoon, between 2:30 and 5:30. That means there's generally about 35-40 minutes in between buses, which makes it rather important that you don't miss your bus. Being fully aware of that fact, I made a point of being VERY early to the bus stop coming home for the first several days, and of noting when the bus actually came. The Capitol Complex, where I work, is in between the first two time checks on the route. The bus literature advises you to be at the stop 5 minutes before the bus is supposed to arrive at your stop. Now, most stops are not listed as time checks, so there isn't necessarily a published schedule of when the bus is supposed to be at your particular stop. However, the first two time checks are 10 minutes apart, and my stop is pretty much right in the middle of them, so I figured it would just make sense for me to be at my stop at the time when the bus is supposed to be leaving the beginning of the route. And that is what I did for the first week, and, at the earliest, I was picked up maybe 3 or 4 minutes after the published time for the first time check.So this week, while I certainly still made it a point to be down at the stop at 3:25, which is the published time for the first time check on the trip I want to catch, I also made a point not to be there much before that anymore, because I was just going to increase my waiting time. With today being a cold, wet, ugly day, I especially was not in any hurry. All of that being said, my cell phone read 3:24 when I got to the stop, or in other words, still one minute before the route was supposed to start a good mile or so away, and at least 5 minutes earlier than the bus had ever been there before. So I waited. Then I saw the bus that usually comes right before my bus. And then I waited some more. And then I saw a bus I had never seen before, which got me a bit concerned, but not too much so because I had been picked up later than this before. So I waited. And then I saw a couple more buses that I'd never seen before, and I was now pretty irritated, because it was very late and either the bus was unacceptably late, or it had been very early and I had missed it. About 10 minutes later I conceded defeat, went back into my building, went to the bathroom, and then returned at about 4:00 to wait for the next bus, which is scheduled to be at the beginning of the route at 4:10. This bus was running normally, and I got picked up around 4:15, after wasting a good 40 minutes of my day.You know, I understand that a bus schedule is never going to be perfect, traffic is just too variable an entity for that, but this sort of thing does really bother me. Most people who know me know that I'm prompt almost to a fault, if that's possible. This isn't to say that I'll never miss a bus, but I'll never do so because of pure negligence. It would be a little easier to stomach if my stop was further along the route, but it's not, and I have a hard time understanding how you're doing a pickup at a spot that's 5 minutes or more into your route before the route is even supposed to begin. Anyhow, I've learned my lesson, and I'll be there at 3:20 from now on, only to never again have the bus show up much before 3:30.
Well, here we are, 1 1/2 months after the NCAA Final Four, and another basketball league is about to reduce it's championship field to 4 teams. If you'll remember, I registered my disgust with the media after the field was set for the underlying suggestion that there was something missing or lacking from the Final Four because all 4 #1 seeds made it there for the first time. Well, we're about to see a similar scenario play out here in the NBA, and I detect the same attitude from fans and some media, and it makes even less sense now than it did back in March.Just to level set everyone, the second round of the NBA playoffs will wrap up tonight with Game 7 between San Antonio and New Orleans. As it stands right now, the Eastern Conference Finals will be between the #1 seeded Celtics and the #2 seeded Pistons. In the West, the #1 seeded Lakers await tonight's winner, either the #2 seeded Hornets, or the defending champion Spurs. So, one way or another, the "final four" of the NBA will also be an all-favorites gathering. As I said back in March, I absolutely love this sort of thing. Why in the world wouldn't a basketball fan want to see the best teams battling it out for the biggest prize? And yet, I sense an overall sense of disappointment with the playoffs and what they've brought us. I've seen the terms "underwhelming" and "lackluster" used, and I just don't totally get it. In college hoops, I can understand the "root for the little guy" mentality, even if I don't totally buy into it. But this is the NBA - there are no little guys. There's just inferior pro basketball teams.I think in this case, we were all led to expect something different, and so when we didn't get what we expected, we were left a bit puzzled. While pretty much everyone would have seen the East holding form, the wackiness of the regular season out in the West led most to expect the same from the playoffs. The matchups seemed compelling, and I doubt too many people would have thought we could have gotten this far without a lower seed prevailing in a series. But we have, and while that's unexpected, I don't see it as inherently bad, or disappointing in anyway. It's a classic example of a hype being created that overshadows the event itself. People were led (and I think fairly, to some degree) to expect a wild and wacky playoff season. What they got, for the most part, was a very hotly contested playoffs that have, for all of that, held form. These playoffs have been lackluster? Really? Do we forget the #8 seed Atlanta Hawks coming one game short of pulling off what would have been the greatest upset in NBA playoff history against the Celtics? Didn't the Celtics and Cavs just finish off another tough 7 gamer? Aren't the Spurs and Hornets going to settle matters in a winner take all battle tonight? And, isn't the Finals matchup that "everyone" wants, Lakers v. Celtics, still alive and well. While I'd be hard pressed to categorize the playoffs thus far as "great", I think disappointing, underwhelming, or lackluster goes to far. These haven't be bad playoffs, they've just been playoffs that have failed to match the hype and expectations put on them. And that's really the reality of the media-driven age we live in - it seems like we only recognize and appreciate greatness when it surprises us. When we see it coming, we burden it with expectations and then dismiss it when it fails to live up to those expectations. Or, we define it as one thing and then miss the point when it shows up in another form.
I'll come clean, I went through a reality TV phase a few years ago. Nothing all that serious, but when I first got my DVR, 3 of the 4 shows I had set to record every week were The Apprentice, The Amazing Race, and Survivor. That phase has pretty much gone now, with the last holdover, Survivor, not getting programmed into the DVR for Season 18, after I'd watched disinterestedly the last 2 or 3 seasons. I will say that I never got into any kind of reality shows that weren't some sort of game or competition. While the term "reality TV" is generally always a misnomer to some degree, for most of the genre, it's a total misnomer. Sticking cameras in someone's house and just letting them roll, with their full knowledge, is not conducive to recording "reality".Anyhow, one reality show that I had interest in at the beginning but quickly cooled on was American Idol. I followed the first season pretty closely, and even a good bit of the second, but by season 3, I had totally soured on it and moved on. The fact that show introduced Carrie Underwood to the world is the only thing that has prevented me from openly mocking the show in recent years. My eternal gratitude to the show for that contribution to society aside, it's been years since I've even thought of turning on an episode. And the truth is that in a lot of ways, Underwood's country success is one of the few real claims the show has to continued relevance. The last two seasons have failed to even produce a platinum debut album for the winner, and Underwood joins first season winner Kelly Clarkson and 2nd season runner-up Clay Aiken as the only AI alums to produce more than one platinum selling album. Even Clarkson and Aiken seem to be losing some steam with their most recent releases.So I tell you all of that to tell you this: The American Idol producers have gone country. Several weeks ago, CMT launched Can You Duet, the search for the next great country duo. As has been well documented on this blog, I am a devotee of country music, so I decided to check it out, and I have to admit, I've greatly enjoyed what I've seen so far.Given it's shared producers, the show, of course, borrows a lot from American Idol, starting with its three judge panel: Country icon Naomi Judd, decorated country songwriter Aimee Mayo, and noted vocal coach Brett Manning. The show began with 2 audition shows, which were used to select (I think) 25 duos, both from established pairs and singles who were split up from their partners at audition time, to advance to the next round. After "workshop week", which consisted of one on one sessions with the judges and a couple performances followed by cuts, the field was narrowed down to 8 duos, who are now competing in live stage performances to win a recording contract from Sony BMG Nashville. However, unlike American Idol, where audience voting takes over once the final competition begins, the judges are still calling the shots in Can You Duet, making the calls on who goes home each week.So, why do I like this show and despise American Idol? Well, I'm sure some of it has to do with my bias toward country music as a genre, and I do greatly enjoy watching these final contestants give some fresh takes on a lot of great songs I love. However, there are other reasons as well. First of all, less is more, in my opinion. Can You Duet runs for one hour once a week, while American Idol generally chews up 2, 3, and I think sometimes even 4 hours with it's two weekly shows. And yet Can You Duet contains roughly the same amount of actual competition content, which means there is all kinds of useless fluff in the American Idol broadcasts. One of things notably absent from the CMT show is all the crazy melodrama and the taking of 15+ minutes and multiple commercial breaks to reveal the final decision. Now, that's not to say that I wouldn't expect efforts to use more time if Can You Duet was to become a massive hit, but on it's face, it takes much more of a cut to the chase approach. There's certainly the use of artificially created drama, it's just not as much.Secondly, I love this panel of judges, for a number of reasons. First, each one of them is highly credentialed and knows a thing or two about what they are watching. There's no Paula in this group, and no Simon, and they all are capable of offering both insightful and intelligent praise, as well as worthwhile and constructive criticism of performances - both of which were usually notably absent from the comments of the Idol judges. While it's clear at points that they are doing some show for the cameras, it's also equally clear to me that they are very invested in these performers and interested in helping them grow and improve throughout the course of the competition, and you've clearly seen that take place. I find that to be highly appealing.Finally, I can't tell you how much I enjoy the fact that this show isn't audience participation when it comes to choosing the winner. The AI phone voting system, where you can vote over and over again if you can get through, is a total joke, and always has been. It's also highly detrimental to keeping all of the best talent around until late in the game. I don't watch anymore, but it's hard not to get wind of the various "controversial" votes that occur each season, along with the inevitable suggestions that Idol is rigged. I've never bought into that, I just think that the voting system lends itself to wacky results. As cute and as novel an idea as letting the public decide this sort of thing is, I'd just as soon let the people who really know music make those calls.I'm also quite interested to see how this pans out for the eventual winners. I do find a couple of the duos to be exceedingly talented, and think they would be capable of sustained success. However, while they will get a recording contract, they aren't going to have the benefit of the massive built-in fan base that Idol alums have due to the much more limited audience of the show. I think they'll still have an uphill climb to meet with any kind of real success. The fact that American Idol's original country cousin, Nashville Star, which has only aired on USA going into the upcoming season which will be on NBC, has yet to produce a winner that had any consistent success, seems to back me up in that regard.
Okay, so we've got another softball post coming here. Trust me, I don't plan on dwelling on the details of my softball season for the rest of the summer, but the last two games have been the most interesting sports-related happenings in my life lately.Anyhow, last night's game was kind of depressing, because we didn't hit well as a team (and I was terrible individually), and we lost both games of the doubleheader. However, I was a part of 2 of the craziest plays I've ever been involved in while I was playing in the field, and they both happened within a couple innings of each other in the 2nd game, and I was playing at two different positions in the field for each one.The first play came while I was catching. Now, catching in slow pitch softball is, generally, a very boring ordeal. You kneel behind the plate, you catch the pitches that the batters don't swing at, and you toss them back to the pitcher. There's relatively little action at the plate in slow pitch, and when it comes, it's often not very good, like the rare foul tip that comes backwards right at your head. That being said, we have some outfielders that have very good arms by the standards of church league softball, and they don't hesitate to try and make a play at the plate, especially when I'm catching. They like it when I'm back there, because sometimes they aren't the most accurate, and I'm very good at keeping an errant throw from becoming even worse. I also have a pretty good glove, and I'm generally fearless about a runner bearing down on me (probably too fearless, really), so if they do make a good throw, they know there's a very high probability of me making the catch and the tag. Anyhow, in this particular inning, there was a ball hit through the infield to right-center. The runner on second tried to score, and our right-centerfielder made a perfect one hop throw that I fielded cleanly, well ahead of the incoming runner. As I, instinctively, went down to tag him, he jumped over the top of me. This is actually a very intelligent play, since he's going up as I'm moving down, but I think it should be illegal, because it highly dangerous to both the catcher, and the runner. Catchers have been kicked in the head before, and runners have been tripped up and done face plants. In fact, it actually might be illegal, because I think by rule you're supposed to surrender or slide in that situation, but I'm not 100% sure of the rule, and I don't know that I remember ever seeing an ump calling someone out on those grounds. Anyhow, nothing tragic happened here, he got over top of me relatively cleanly, but I did manage to get my glove up and tag him. He didn't think I got him, and it's very possible he didn't feel it, because I may have just ticked his shorts, but I definitely felt something brush my glove as he went by. And fortunately, the umpire either saw it, or just gave me the benefit of the doubt since the ball beat the runner, like some umps do, and he called him out.A couple innings later, I was out at second base, which is where I had played the first game and where I play most of the time these days. I'm generally adept at fielding ground balls, and pretty much always have been. The weak link in my fielding prowess in the infield has always been the pop-up hit back over my head. I'm getting much better with them, but I'm still not comfortable with them. I'm most comfortable with ones that are looped off to my left and that I know immediately I have to really run for. Well, there was one of those hit, and I took off after it. I actually tracked it quickly enough that I was able to call for it because I knew I could get to it, but I was still on the run. I stretched out the glove, the ball goes in, but to my horror, it squirted back out and popped up a bit. Keeping my eye on it all the way, I took another shot with the glove, but wasn't quick enough and it hit off the heel of the glove, knocking it back towards me. At this point, I was falling forward, and I desperately grabbed for the ball with my bare hand and clutched it to my chest. I hit the ground, ball pressed firmly to my chest, and ended up rolling over, on top of the ball. As soon as I completed the roll and got to my back, I held the ball up above me, knowing that I made the catch, and praying that the umpire, who wouldn't have been able to see the ball during the roll, saw it the same way. Thankfully, he did! That, my friends, is how you take a moderately difficult play and turn it into a webgem.I'm sure that was intensely boring to all of you, but thank you for your time anyhow.
Okay, so last night I was on the wrong end of what may just be the worst call in softball history. Okay, that's probably not fair, but it would rank up there with any bad call I've ever witnessed.Now, let me lay out some background here. I play church league softball. We're in the highest division of our church league, but it's still church league, so not exactly the highest level of softball. We only have one umpire per game, and especially during the early part of the season when umpires are still needed for area high school baseball and softball, we don't always exactly get the cream of the crop in umpires. Even very good umpires miss their share of calls in a one umpire system, so missed calls are just part of the deal in church league softball. Over the course of the season, you're going to be on both ends of them on many occasions. For this reason, I'm usually very good about not getting worked up about a bad call, with the exception of perhaps an initial expression of disgust. And really, I'm over this one as well, and was before I left the field after last night's game, but it was so crazy I just had to share.
Anyhow, let me set the scene. It's the bottom of the 8th inning (we're only supposed to play 7) and we're in the field with the game still tied. I play second base. There's 1 out, runner on first base. There's a ground ball hit to my left, just between me and the base. I get to it, and don't field it quite cleanly, and I go down to pick it up. Not fielding it cleanly ruled out any shot at a double play, so with the runner bearing down on me and me still down on one knee, I decide to tag him rather than try a flip to second. I'm right in the guy's way, and he really doesn't even do much to avoid the tag, but rather just seems to be trying to run through it. He whacks into my glove, basically going over top of me, and really knocking my glove backwards. Given the force of the impact and the fact that I hadn't been able to keep my 2nd hand on the glove for stability, I'm worried that the impact might have jarred the ball loose, so I whip my head around to look towards where the glove is now. Nope, ball still securely in the glove. I'm very pleased. As I start to get up, I'm now hearing what sounds like my teammates complaining to the umpire. I get up and look at the ump, and realize he's now explaining to my complaining teammates why he called the runner SAFE! My mind is absolutely blown at this point, and the umpire explains that he didn't see the tag made. I believe he claimed to have been partially obstructed by our pitcher. Are you freaking kidding me? Noteworthy here is that the other team scored the winning run with 2 outs in that inning. Now, the winning run scored on an error, and we had numerous chances to win the game before extra innings, so I'm not one to say the ump "cost" us the game. That's not in my nature, and it's wouldn't be accurate. What would be a fair statement was that his miss of the call was a contributing factor to us losing the game at that point. The ump did make sure he was in his car by the time the post game prayer finished, though. He really didn't need to.
Anyhow, like I said, missed calls are a part of church league softball, and I've moved on. However, this particular one points out something that has been a pet peeve of mine with this umpiring association for years. First of all, if I buy that the guy didn't technically "see" the tag, given how the play went, there was still plenty of concrete evidence that the tag occurred, most predominantly the slap of leather against skin. Secondly, and my real point, I didn't really move from where the ball was hit during the whole time the play took place. Umpires start behind the plate, but once the ball is in play, it's their job to get out from behind the plate and get into position to see the play. I won't deny that this guy probably tried to do so, but the guy (like a couple other guys we see from time to time) is way too old and immobile to be umpiring in a one ump system like that. It concerns me both from a quality of umpiring standpoint, and from a safety of the umpire standpoint. We had a guy who was older and less mobile than this guy last year, and he got hit hard twice in a game by throws coming into the plate. The one throw caught him squarely in the leg, but the other took his glasses off. I was catching at the time, and these were ridiculously wild throws, but they were still throws that if you can't get out of the way of them, you shouldn't be umpiring anymore. It's that simple. I know it's hard to find umpires, but at some point the umpiring association has to step in and say "Sorry, but you're done."
When it's all said and done, I have to at least chuckle a bit at the irony of it being ruled that I missed this particular tag. I'm not sure I've made a more complete and solid tag in my entire almost 20 years playing baseball and softball.
Since no one else seems interested in guessing, and since I don't have any brilliant ideas for a regular entry today, here are the answers for my movie quiz. Amanda wins, almost essentially by default. "De-fault! The two greatest words in the English language!"#1. Well, I guess if a person never quit when the going got tough, they wouldn't anything to regret for the rest of their life. Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story - This is one of Lance Armstrong's lines from what may be my all-time favorite single scene in any comedy. One of the most incredible guilt trips EVER.#2. What we do in life... echos in eternity. Gladiator - Maximus says this to his troops as he's firing them up before the opening battle. Gladiator had about a 2 1/2 year run as my all-time favorite movie, and then I saw the Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.#3. I have respect for beer. I have respect for beer! A Beautiful Mind - I'm guessing no one had this line coming from a former Best Picture winner, but it comes from an exchange between John Nash and his first delusion, his "roommate", Charles, who has just acknowledged a lack of respect for cognitive reverie, but announced ernormous respect for pizza, and of course beer.#4. I trust everyone. It's the devil inside them I don't trust. The Italian Job - This is a saying of master thief (and deceased from the early scenes of the movie) John Bridger that his daughter Stella picked up. Were it not for Ocean's 11, The Italian Job would be my favorite crime related movie ever. I left Ocean's 11 out of the contest because I assumed I'd have to go uber-obscure to have a chance of slipping a line from that one by my readship.#5. So long, Earth. Catch you on the flip side. Apollo 13 - Jack Sweigert says this while looking out the shuttle window just before passing onto the dark side of the moon.#6. Oh, I don't think anybody could puke more than that kid. I think I saw a boot come out of him. The Wedding Singer - Robbie Hart, in reference to a young boy who got himself some alcohol at a wedding reception and had a less than pleasant experience with it.#7. In case I don't see you, good afternoon, good evening, and good night! TheTruman Show - Truman's standard morning greeting.#8. "Is them 'is brains, doctor?" "No, that's just dried blood. THOSE are his brains." Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World - Yes, I was (and continue to be) to some degree, a fan of Russell Crowe's work. This, however, is not his character from that movie. The ship's doctor is performing head surgery on one of the crew, many of whom are looking on in wonder.#9. I will bring you hope, old friend. And I ask only one thing in return: don't get in my way. X-Men - Magento's response to Xavier's statement that he's looking for hope in Magneto's thoughts. #10. Earn this. Saving Private Ryan - Tom Hanks' character to Private Ryan as he and the rest of the platoon are dying to keep Ryan alive.#11, Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane. The Shawshank Redemption - Red's cynical response to Andy's belief that you have to keep up hope, even inside the prison walls. Little did Red know...
My good friend and fellow conservative Jeff made an impassioned post a few weeks ago explaining why his decision to begin riding his bike to work was not him "going green", such as it were. Of course, as soon as I read it and saw him online, I called him a lousy hippie. That's what friends do, after all.Anyhow, it would seem that, even though I was joking, reality has a cold sense of irony on this one, because today, I purchased a bus pass. Now, much like Jeff, this decision was made with my best interests in mind first, and any aid to the well-being of the planet as just a bonus. As I mentioned previously, I'm now working at PENNDOT's main building in downtown Harrisburg, rather than at my normal office. One of the drawbacks of this change (aside from this building's ability to deflect AM radio waves and prevent me from getting my daily fix of sports talk radio) is that I'm leaving behind my regular office's private (and free) parking lot for the time being, and having to deal with the realities of city parking.Personal cost is not necessarily an issue here when it comes to the parking, as my company will be reimbursing me for any parking expenses I incur. However, the garage nearest to my building is a city run lot, which are, of course, the most expensive lots available. And so my boss was, I'll say strongly encouraging me, to look into parking in a private lot, which is about 3/4 the price. I understood the concern, but I had two problems with the lot in question. First of all, it was a really crappy lot. It's just a gravel lot, and there's nothing even resembling security that I could see. Secondly, and most importantly, it's about 2 to 3 times further from my office than the city lot. I suck at estimating the actual distances, but I'm guessing it would have been at least a 15 minute walk, 2 times a day, every day. Now, I'm not opposed to walking, but if you're in PA today, you'll understand why I wasn't incredibly thrilled with the idea. (50 degrees all day, raining, etc) So, I was pretty well determined that I was going to just force my companies hand and tell them I was going to park in the city lot and if they really wanted to, they could just reimburse me for the cost of the cheaper lot. However, before I took on the risk of possibly having to eat that extra expense, I did research other options.The best option, as you can guess, was the bus. I can drive about a mile, park for free along the road (but in a very public place), and pick up the bus, which will drop me off right by my building. The monthly bus pass is about half of what even parking in the cheaper lot would have been, so the company makes out. The move all but eliminates any serious walking for me, so that concern is addressed. And, as an added bonus, I lose about 10-12 city miles/day in my car. There was a time not too long ago when that wouldn't have been a big deal, but with a car getting about 20 city miles to the gallon and gas creeping up on 4 dollars a gallon, it should add up.So I, like my buddy Jeff, am not going green. But you may call me a hippie if you like. And I should say, I have absolutely nothing against being environmentally responsible. In fact, I'm quite in favor of it. You give me a choice between two otherwise pretty similar options where one is more environmentally sound and I'll take the environmentally friendly option every time. I think that being good stewards of the environment goes along with the kind of stewardship that should characterize every aspect of the Christian life. I just think a lot of the modern environmental movement goes well beyond stewardship into a level of conservationism that becomes reckless. And the only thing I have against mass transit is that in Harrisburg (like many/most places that offer it) it's not viable on it's own, and so only exists on government subsidy, which in general rankles my Libertarian leaning mind.I will say, however, that I find the fact that this all occurred after the weekend in which I officially became a Libertarian (I renewed my driver's license which finally presented me with a ready opportunity to change my affiliation with expending any actual effort) rather fascinating.
I just finished reading Last Dance, by John Feinstein. The book is a look behind the scenes at college basketball's Final Four. Using the events of the 2005 Final Four as his backdrop, Feinstein looked at the history and present day realities of the Final Four from just about every angle you could think of. The stories he conveyed profiled players, coaches, officials, members of the media, even the highly "mysterious" tournament committee.It took me longer to get through this one than I had taken for any of my last several books, but that is more of a testament to a crunch on available reading time than anything else, because I really enjoyed the book. Feinstein has a reputation as one of the finest storytellers in sports, and it is clearly well earned. College hoops is probably my second favorite sport to follow, behind baseball, and so it was a great trip through the history of the event, and I found it especially enlightening to get a look at some of the faces that have defined the Final Four for years, but that don't necessarily often get any real attention. It was also great to get a look back at the days before the Final Four became the event and spectacle that it is today. It's really hard to think of the Final Four as anything other than one of the biggest events of the sporting calendar, but it didn't start that way, nor did it get there overnight.One thing that really stuck out for me as I read through was that for someone who enjoys the college game as much as I do, I'm not really as familiar with some of the basic history as I would think I should be. I've even managed to miss a lot of things that have taken place in the 20 years since I first remember watching the Final Four. Many of the events that were conveyed in this book were such that I'd either seen or heard touched on many times, but never really looked into what they were. I'd like to rectify that situation to a degree as soon as possible.
To that end, I ran out last night and picked up Glory Road, in which legendary coach Don Haskins tells the story of his team's victory in the 1966 NCAA championship game, a game that is often credited as being the most important title game in college history. Haskins defeated an all-white Kentucky team with a team that started 5 African-Americans. I know the basics of this story, and I've seen the movie that was based off this book, but I'm really looking forward to getting a more in depth look at this team and their story.
#1. This week, I got loaned out to do some work for another department at work, so rather than working at my normal desk in my normal building, I'm working at PENNDOT's main headquarters in downtown Harrisburg for the next several weeks. This is a nice change of pace, it's higher profile work, and it should be good resume building as well. There's only one problem: I discovered today that the building I'm working in now appears to be impervious to AM radio waves. That totally sucks, because it means that unless I can find something to rectify the problem and get reception at my desk, I'm going to be without my daily fix of Dan Patrick and Jim Rome indefinitely. So, there's a good possibility I'll be less connected than usual with the sports media for the foreseeable future.
#2. One connection to the sports media that no building can take away from me is my Sports Illustrated subscription, and I started into the current issue (it comes in the mail on Thursday) over lunch today. SI informs me that Jose Canseco is not only working on a 3rd book (this time, a novel about a baseball cloning conspiracy), but is also working on a movie about his life. The kicker with the movie is that he plans on having a reality show to choose the "lucky" individual who will get to portray him in the movie. I'm not sure what bothers me more - the idea of a show featuring a bunch of guys trying their best to act like Canseco, or the knowledge that people will likely actually watch it.
#3. This isn't particularly breaking news, but I do have to express my frustration over it. I devoted sometime to the scandal at Indiana surrounding recruiting violations by then basketball coach Kelvin Sampson. Sampson was let go from Indiana after agreeing to a 750,000 dollar buyout of his remaining contract, and until recently was doing some consulting work for the San Antonio Spurs. Sampson has been hired as an assistant coach by the Milwaukee Bucks. On the flip side, Indiana's basketball program is in shambles heading into the upcoming season. New coach Tom Crean (who was a very good hire, in my opinion) is left with only 4 players returning from last year's team, after a wave of transfers, cuts, and other things. It is going to be a VERY difficult next couple of years for Crean and IU as a result of the fallout from Sampson's scandal. There is something fundamentally offensive to me about the idea of the misbehaving coach getting a nice sum of money and a job in the NBA, while the school and many of the kids he left in his wake flounders. And yet, I really don't know what was to be done in this situation. Sampson would have zero chance of getting another college job right now, and it's not like the NCAA can extend it's punishment to prevent him from taking an NBA job. It would be nice, for once, to see a stand taken with someone in Sampson's position, and not just brush aside offenses because he's a heck of a coach. But talent always gets another chance. I don't have a ton of sympathy for IU, they knew what they were getting when they brought Sampson in, but still, sometimes there just isn't justice.
I'm not above stealing a good idea when I see it, so have at it.#1. Well, I guess if a person never quit when the going got tough, they wouldn't anything to regret for the rest of their life.#2. What we do in life... echos in eternity.#3. I have respect for beer. I have respect for beer! #4. I trust everyone. It's the devil inside them I don't trust. #5. So long, Earth. Catch you on the flip side.#6. Oh, I don't think anybody could puke more than that kid. I think I saw a boot come out of him.#7. In case I don't see you, good afternoon, good evening, and good night!#8. "Is them 'is brains, doctor?" "No, that's just dried blood. THOSE are his brains."#9. I will bring you hope, old friend. And I ask only one thing in return: don't get in my way. #10. Earn this. #11, Let me tell you something my friend. Hope is a dangerous thing. Hope can drive a man insane.*UPDATE* I had to go back in and add #11, because I was totally mad at myself that I hadn't used the movie originally!
Here we go again: http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=280505008.For the record, I do not care about the outcome of the NBA 2nd round playoff series between the Pistons and the Magic. Furthermore, I do not believe that, in this case, the controversial play "decided" the outcome. And to their credit, the Magic have taken the high road, by publicly stating that the play in question was not the reason they lost. And I absolutely agree, a 3 pointer that may or may not have happened at the end of the 3rd quarter is not the deciding factor in a game that was decided by 7 points.And yet, I am continually and consistently frustrated with the way professional sports leagues almost willfully subject themselves to missing calls that they just shouldn't have to miss. For a quick recap in case you decided not to read through the whole article, on the last play of the 3rd quarter, with the Pistons in possession of the ball, the clock froze at 4.8 seconds. The play continued on, and the Pistons hit a 3 that replays indicated would have occurred after the buzzer had the clock continued to run. Unfortunately, however, NBA rules do not allow the referees to use those such replays in that situation, and so they were forced to estimate where the clock should have been, and continue on. They ruled the basket good, and in fact left half a second on the clock.Why in the world aren't officials allowed to use replay to get the time right in a situation like that? It's just incomprehensible to me. This isn't a matter of replay disrupting the flow of the game. In this case, the game was disrupted for several minutes anyhow to come to what appears to be the wrong decision. And anytime there's a clock malfunction at any point of a game, there's going to be a stoppage to get things settled properly. Why not give officials the tools to use that stoppage to actually set things right?The NBA dodged a bullet here, in my opinion. What happened last night could easily have happened at the end of the 4th quarter with a shot that would have been a deciding factor in the game. Here's hoping this kind of near miss spurs the league onto some action. There's just no reason with the technology currently available that we should be guessing on this sort of thing anymore.
Like most Americans these days, I'm not really a horse racing fan. Generally, I may catch one of either the Kentucky Derby and Preakness, and then if there's a possible Triple Crown at stake, I'll make a point to watch the Belmont. I used to watch all 3 races every year, and would occasionally even catch some of the prep races. Not so much anymore.And to be honest, I didn't even watch Saturday's race live. However, like anyone who was tuned into the sports world for the rest of the week end, I'm very aware of what happened. That is to say, I'm aware of what happened after the race. I'm relatively certain you could have read a good deal about the Derby and not actually found out who won, because the bigger story was the fate of runner-up Eight Belles, a filly that collapsed shortly after the race with 2 broken ankles, and was euthanized on the track.Before I move on, I have to make sure I acknowledge what a sad event this sort of thing is. I'm not the sort of nut you heard of that was posting get well messages to Barbaro back in 2006 after that horse came up lame in the Preakness and was eventually euthanized after a long run of surgeries and treatments. A horse is just that, a horse. But I do have an affinity for animals, and thoroughbred horses are such beautiful and majestic creatures, it's an absolute pity to see one have it's life cut short in this manner. While I would stop short of calling horse racing cruelty to animals, I do think the business needs to take a long look at itself and see if there aren't practices involved that are placing these animals at undue risk of harm.All of that being said, some of the fallout from this sad event has me rather aggravated. First of all, there's nothing that annoys me more in the sports media than someone grandstanding about something they clearly don't have all their facts straight on. And, as much as I like Dan Patrick, he was doing that today. Patrick devoted, in my estimation, at least 1/2 of his show today to discussion of Eight Belles. Maybe Patrick does generally pay attention to horse racing, but if so, he was clearly off his game and did not do his research for the topic. He made this clear by repeatedly saying how "finally a favorite won at the Derby". While the favorite winning the Derby has been relatively uncommon over the last 30 years, this was actually the second year in a row that the favorite was triumphant. Furthermore, Patrick, when referencing the injury to Eight Belles, talked about how this had happened last year with Barbaro. Barbaro was injured in the Preakness in 2006, after winning the Derby. All of this made it more frustrating to hear Patrick assail NBC for not show more replays of the actual injury to Eight Belles. NBC showed only a more distant overhead view of the incident, and nothing close up. He accused NBC of having a responsibility to show the incident to the viewers, while not being gratuitous, so people could actually see what had happened. I might tend to agree with Patrick to some extent, except that NBC had stated quite publicly since the race that the shot they showed was the only one they had of the actual injury, since Eight Belles was not one of the horses they targeted for individual attention, and since the collapse had occurred after the race and beyond the finish line. And I'd be willing to question that statement, had I not been watching the Preakness 2 years ago and seen the close-up replays of Barbaro coming up lame after the start over and over again. And honestly, I'd have been okay if Patrick had said that he didn't buy NBC's explanation, but he didn't do that. So, he either was woefully ignorant of the facts surrounding the story, or he ignored them for the sake of his grandstand. Either is unacceptable.And of course, where there's an animal dying in the news, there's always going to be PETA. And you know, I could honestly abide PETA's involvement in this kind of situation, if they were going about it in a sensible manner. Like I said before, I don't doubt there are things that could be done to make horse racing safer for the horses, and such things should be looked into. And I'm sure the horse racing business will be doing so, because it's really bad for business to keep having these major injuries occur on their grandest stage. How many casual horse racing fans who only pay attention for the Derby were completely put off by what happened on Saturday? However, PETA being PETA, they aren't behaving sensibly, and instead made waves by insisting that the injury obviously occurred during the race, and that the jockey knew the horse was injured and pressed him onward anyhow trying to win the race. They are calling for his suspension while the accident is investigated.That's just irresponsible on so many levels. First of all, as I just noted, we haven't even seen close replays of the incident. How in the heck can anyone claim with any certainty to know the details of how/when the injury occurred at this point? Secondly, while I don't watch a ton of horse racing, I've seen a number of races in which horses were injured. A common characteristic of those races was the jockey pulling the horse up as quickly as possible and trying to get them off the track. This was the case with Barbaro in 2006, and even more poignantly with Charismatic in 1999. Charismatic, who had won the first two legs of the Triple Crown, was coming down the stretch in the Belmont, when the horse slowed up, and shortly after the finish, his jockey jumped off and famously held up the horse's left front leg, allowing the horse to walk and stand without putting any pressure on the leg. These jockeys, as a rule, care about these horses and wouldn't press on knowing the horse was injured. If you wanted to make the suggestion that the lure of winning the Derby and the money that would result from it would be enough to override care for a horse, you still have to deal with the fact that a jockey who would press forward with an injured horse is risking his life along with that of the horse, and potentially the lives of other jockey and other horses. Eight Belles was running 2nd in the Derby, which means there were 18 horses behind her as she came down the stretch. If she goes down, the jockey is going down with her, and both are likely going to get trampled. So, am I here to say there is no possibility that the jockey kept pressing the horse knowing she was injured? No, I can't do that. But I can say it's totally irresponsible to suggest this to be the case without anything resembling evidence. But, then again, it's PETA.So, that's all I have on the Derby. Chances are the Derby winner (favorite Big Brown, by the way) will go on to lose in the Preakness (which I will likely watch), and then I can go back to my normal stance of paying minimal attention to horse racing.
Okay, so this blog isn't exactly a happy, uplifting place at the moment, but I have to air another grievance.I am a Phillies fan. I live approximately 100 miles from Philadelphia. Yet, I cannot listen to Phillies games on the radio, nor can I get more than about 20% of them on my TV. The TV thing I don't groan too much about, because at least to some degree, it's of my own choosing. If I wanted to switch back to Comcast for my TV service, I would then get Comcast Sports Net Philadelphia again, and that would allow me to see virtually every Phillies game on TV. It frustrates me a bit that Comcast won't make that channel available to satellite providers (they have several other regional sports networks which ARE available on satellite), but they are a business and so I understand their position. Besides, it's probably best for me that I don't have a Phillies game to sit down and watch 6 out of every 7 nights during the baseball season.The radio bit is something I just don't get, however. As long as I can remember, there's been a Harrisburg station that carried the Phillies games. That changed last year, when AM 1460 stopped carrying the Phillies games and started their own broadcast of the Harrisburg Senators games. I'm sure on some level that was a sound business move for them, but I really can't understand why no other Harrisburg station has picked the games back up, especially given that for one of the few times in the long history of the Phillies, the team has actually been competative for a number of years. Anyhow, I've mainly come to terms with that particular grieveance as well. I've been able to compensate in a number of ways. I can usually pick up AM 1210 out of Philly from my car, and when I'm in the house, I can get the games streamed over the internet via a plan I pay 15 bucks a season for. A pain, yes but nothing terrible.However, these last few days the whole offense of 1460 broadcasting the Senators rather than carrying the Phillies took a new twist. 1460 is sports talk station I listen to during the day at work. The Senators, like any team, occasionally will play a midweek afternoon game, which meant 1460 would cut away from Jim Rome for my last hour and a half at work. Not the biggest deal, but minorly annoying because I have no real desire to listen to minor league baseball. Attending a minor league game is great fun, but listening to it over the radio is not so much, especially when it comes in place of a radio show I find very entertaining. Yesterday, however, I'm in the middle of listening to Dan Patrick, and all of a sudden, at freakin' 10:30 am, they cut in with a Senators' broadcast from Altoona. Who in their right mind schedules a professional baseball game for 10:30 am in Pennsylvania in late April/early May? I'm relatively certain the temperature never cleared 60 during yesterday's game, and then to compound matters, today's game was ALSO a 10:30 game. Are you kidding me?Okay, I've cleared the air on that one, and I feel better. Thankfully that series is over and the Senators don't play another midweek day game until next week.
