Most of you have likely heard of today's passing of longtime New York Yankees owner George Steinbrenner. The controversial Mr. Steinbrenner recently marked his 80th birthday although he had been in poor health for several years, and has rarely been seen in public in that time.
Back in the early 1970s, Steinbrenner lead a group of investors who purchased the badly-run Yankees from CBS. Yes, THAT CBS! At the press conference at which the deal was announced, George stated he would not be involved in the day-to-day operations of the ball club, but would rather concentrate on his principal business, shipbuilding. We know that his declaration, while likely meant at the time, soon proved to be a hollow one. He got involved in the down and dirty details of running the team, hiring and firing at will, and just as often re-hiring those fired just as quickly. The multiple hirings and firings of Billy Martin as manager were the prime example.
George eventually bought out most of his business partners in the Yankees, taking the title of General Partner as well as President and owner. After one of the few remaining "Limited Partners" sold his shares to Steinbrenner, the man wryly remarked, "There is nothing more limited than being a Limited Partner of George Steinbrenner."
His obsession with rebuilding the fortunes of the team went hand-in-hand with his fierce competitiveness and his desire to go first class with virtually everything. He wanted "Yankees" to be synonymous with First Class. In many ways he achieved that ambition, but often sullied that reputation with his personal failings, including being banned from baseball for two years as a result of being convicted of illegal campaign contributions to the campaign of Richard Nixon.
Steinbrenner raised the bar when free agency started, and opened his wallet to the superstar players. Some will say he bought World Series championships, but spending big bucks on players does not always mean they win all the time. He rekindled the glory of the Yankees, enough to where they once again became the biggest road draw of the season for most teams, and became the team everyone loves to hate as well.
His old-school-football-coach style did not always fit well when it came to running the team and making personnel decisions, but he did make enough good hires to put the foundation in place for a long and successful run at or near the top of the baseball world.
You will have noticed the title of today's post mentions "Legends", as in plural. The second Yankee Legend actually passed first, last week. Unless you are a Yankees fan, you likely have never heard of Bob Sheppard, the public address announcer for the Yankees from 1951-2007. As a p.a. announcer myself, he has filled a warm spot in the Yankees part of my heart for a very long time.
Bob Sheppard had a job teaching English at the college level as well as his job as the announcer for the Yankees, New York (football) Giants, New York Cosmos (soccer), and he did some college sports p.a. as well.
I was very young when I first heard Mr. Sheppard's distinctive style in the background of baseball games on television, and his speaking style has always stayed with me. Once heard, his dulcet tones are never to be forgotten. He once said every name deserved to be pronounced properly, and many people recall seeing him going over names in the pre-game hours, making certain he had it correct. If he had any doubt he would ask the player directly. Visiting players still say hearing him pronounce their names when they come to bat gives them chills every time. He was deliberate in his diction but not pompous. He had a simple style that was reflected in his delivery, the same delivery each time. He would intone, for instance, "Now batting. Number 7. Mickey Mantle. Number 7."
He said Mickey's was his favorite name to announce although he did favor the Latin players because of the flow he saw in their names. One writer said he gave equal prominence to the stars as well as the bench warmers when he announced their names.
I have tried to emulate Mr. Sheppard in one essence, asking for the names of soccer players who play where I do my announcing. Unfortunately, an occasional coach will get the name of his player wrong, and it usually results in a mother turning around and shouting up the correct pronunciation, for which I am grateful.
Current Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter said he could not bear to hear another announcer say his name in Yankee Stadium, so he had it written into his contract that as long as he plays for the Yankees, a recording of Mr. Sheppard's "Number 2. Derek Jeter. Number 2." will play as long as he does.
Although illness prevented Mr. Sheppard from working the past several years, it should be noted that when he worked his last game, he was 96. He was 99 last week when he passed.
May we all have such a long and quality life as the venerable Mr. Sheppard.
Ramblings of a 60 Year Old Man - My thoughts on just about anything, in no particular order; Robert Thomas - author.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Saturday, July 10, 2010
Wouldn't that be our time, Mr. Hand?
Apparently I have been living with my head in the sand and had not heard about Prop 19 in the Land of Fruits and Nuts. This is another amazing proposal to be voted on by the population of Ca. Once again they take the lead. Prop 19 is a proposal to legalize mary-g-wanna for personal use. There is much at stake.
Those in favor claim decriminalizing the drug will lessen crime. The head of the NAACP in the state endorsed it claiming the black and Latino population suffers from a significantly higher arrest rate for possession than the rest of the population. That may be true but it is likely a cause of where police patrol and why. If the higher crime rates were in white neighborhoods I would assume their arrest rate would go up quickly. The drug knows no bounds. Her view maintains less black men would then be incarcerated. That may be true however being stoned in public is likely a criminal offense as well. To be fair there are members of the organization that are now calling for her to resign. Their concern is just another thing to corrupt their children.
There is likely a push for this legalization due to the overwhelming budget deficit the state now faces. Think how much money they can raise with a tax. I'm sure the drug cartels are against it. That in itself might be a reason to pass the law, though I'm sure they will not go out of business as Prop 19 only allows so much for personal use. Still, you won't be able to walk down to the convenience store for a pack of Marlboro 'extra sweet'. There would still be plenty of need for an illegal trade.
Years ago I heard the arguments both for and against. I now don't think it is much worse than alcohol. I do not believe it necessarily leads to harder drugs. It certainly can't be worse than tobacco and all the problems that legal drug has caused. The biggest difference between alcohol and cannabis is the only reason for 99% of the population to smoke mary-g is to get high. You can have a social drink and not get drunk. Intent in the big difference.
If I lived in the state I would likely abstain from voting on this issue. Let them legalize it if they choose. If so there should be harsh penalties if you are under the influence and commit a crime or cause a traffic accident, penalties much tougher than the norm. Why? If you kill someone behind the wheel of a car just because you wanted to get stoned you should never again see the light of day.
Smoke 'em if ya got 'em, stoners.
Those in favor claim decriminalizing the drug will lessen crime. The head of the NAACP in the state endorsed it claiming the black and Latino population suffers from a significantly higher arrest rate for possession than the rest of the population. That may be true but it is likely a cause of where police patrol and why. If the higher crime rates were in white neighborhoods I would assume their arrest rate would go up quickly. The drug knows no bounds. Her view maintains less black men would then be incarcerated. That may be true however being stoned in public is likely a criminal offense as well. To be fair there are members of the organization that are now calling for her to resign. Their concern is just another thing to corrupt their children.
There is likely a push for this legalization due to the overwhelming budget deficit the state now faces. Think how much money they can raise with a tax. I'm sure the drug cartels are against it. That in itself might be a reason to pass the law, though I'm sure they will not go out of business as Prop 19 only allows so much for personal use. Still, you won't be able to walk down to the convenience store for a pack of Marlboro 'extra sweet'. There would still be plenty of need for an illegal trade.
Years ago I heard the arguments both for and against. I now don't think it is much worse than alcohol. I do not believe it necessarily leads to harder drugs. It certainly can't be worse than tobacco and all the problems that legal drug has caused. The biggest difference between alcohol and cannabis is the only reason for 99% of the population to smoke mary-g is to get high. You can have a social drink and not get drunk. Intent in the big difference.
If I lived in the state I would likely abstain from voting on this issue. Let them legalize it if they choose. If so there should be harsh penalties if you are under the influence and commit a crime or cause a traffic accident, penalties much tougher than the norm. Why? If you kill someone behind the wheel of a car just because you wanted to get stoned you should never again see the light of day.
Smoke 'em if ya got 'em, stoners.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tick, Tock: A (Mostly) English Soccer Primer
As the resident soccer expert here (cough!), I can empathize with little brother and his state of perplexity regarding the World's Game, i.e. soccer, nee football, aka footie, aka futbol.
I, too, was once a heathen unbeliever. I had the same experience that Robert T had regarding The Beautiful Game. We played it exactly once in high school gym class, knowing only that we could not pick it up unless we were the goalie (we think!). We did not know that you could actually pick the ball up for a throw-in after it went out-of-bounds, mainly because we were not given any out-of-bounds indicators.
We believed soccer was what those stupid Europeans did because they did not know how to play "real" football, aka "pointyball" to the soccer snobs. Little did we know that the South americans, Africans, Asians, and virtually every other country also played this game!
I started to become more aware of it through my children, as each one wanted to play since all their friends did. They started at the rec level, and progressed through to the club/travel teams. Also along the way they played indoor soccer, sort of hockey without sticks and skates, but with much more scoring than outdoor soccer. And hockey.
A professional soccer match is 90 minutes, more but not less, with each half being 45 minutes or thereabouts. Robert T's main concern is the "untimed" nature of the game, as he sees it. That quirk only exists at the professional level. At all other levels the clock is stopped for injuries, goals, and disciplinary actions (red or yellow cards). The game then resumes upon the official's signal, "and away we go", to quote Jackie Gleason (research project for MegaByte).
At the professional level, all power resides in the center official (referee) to determine not only what calls are to be made (fouls, out-of-bounds, etc.) but also what calls are not to be made (attempts to draw a foul by flopping, or overruling a call by the referee's assistant (formerly: linesman).
The center official is the sole determiner of how much, if any, stoppage time is added to the end of each playing period. Stoppage time (aka extra time, but not overtime) is given for things that normally would stop the clock, such as goals, disciplinary actions, warnings about time-wasting, penalty kicks, and the like. Instead of stopping the clock the match official wears two watches in most cases. One watch keeps the running time of each period; the other is actually stopped and started by the referee as deemed necessary, which is how he determines how much time should be added. You should know that if your team is behind, the added time is never enough, and is always way too much if your team is ahead.
As to why the clock is not stopped, it does not say in the rules, excuse me, the laws of the game, as they are officially known.
If there are further delays in stoppage time, the referee may add additional time to the announced stoppage time; this is known as Added Extra Time (AET in the box score if a goal is scored or a card is given out).
If a goal is scored in stoppage time, it may be recorded in various ways in the box score, depending upon who is doing the write-up: (in the example below, Handsome Son scores a goal in stoppage time):
Handsome Son (90)
or
Handsome Son (93)
or
Handsome Son (90+3)
or
Handsome Son (93 AET)
The number designates the minute in which the goal was scored. If a goal comes moments before the referee is set to blow his whistle to end the match, it is reported by those wonderful wordsmiths, the British) as "Handsome Son scored a goal at the death as Arsenal shocked Manchester United 1-nil at the Emirates on Saturday."
The Emirates is the new stadium wherein Arsenal F.C. play their home matches, after many years at Highbury, a mile or so away, which is now an office and condo development.
"Nil" is the proper soccer term for a team not scoring a goal in a match; a 0-0 score is a nil-draw; a 1-1 match is a score-draw.
Various terms it is handy to know in order to make others think you know what you are about when it comes to soccer:
Draw - what we call a tie game, not to be confused with a "tie", meaning a match still to be played (Arsenal have a mouth-watering tie at Liverpool Saturday next (a week from Saturday)
Result - a win or draw ("We played hard and got a result, which is what we hoped for on the road.")
Training - soccer players do not practice, they train
Pitch - what we call the playing field
Match - what we call a game
Striker - what we call a forward, the main job of which is to score the goals
Boot - a soccer shoe, also what the Brits call the trunk of a car
Onion bag - slang term for the net, used quite often by ESPN's Tommy Smythe
Manager - what we call a coach
Chanting/singing - what the soccer fan does instead of having the type of cheerleader-directed organized cheering we are familiar with at football and basketball games; they may be directed both for an against an individual player, or toward the team as a whole. many are very, shall we say, colorful, in nature. Liverpool fans, at all matches home or away, pledge their support by singing "You'll Never Walk Alone", written by Liverpool fan Gerry Marsden of Gerry and the Pacemakers fame (another MegaByte research project). It is truly an amazing scene, very moving, as the entire crowd stand and sing the song. It gives me chills when I hear it, and I am not a Liverpool supporter.
The Beautiful Game - what soccer is when it is played as a free-flowing game, with skilled passing and defending and wondrous goals being scored. It is also known as being "on song" when a team does it for long periods of a match.
Cynical - a description of an outmanned team whose game plan is to bunker in on defense in an effort to contain a superior team's offense by purposeful fouling, clogging the passing lanes, and making almost no attempt to run an offense of their own. Cynical teams play for a draw and hope to get a lucky break to score and take away a 1-0 win. Scoring a goal in such a manner is called "against the run of play".
Howler - a horrendous gaffe, usually made by a goalie (keeper) that results in an opponent scoring a goal, when by all rights the keeper should have made an easy stop. Witness England's Robert Green gifting the USA an easy goal in their recent World Cup match, for which he was (rightly) excoriated by the British sporting press.
Table - the league table is what we call the standings
The Prem - the Premiership, aka the English Premier League, the top level of soccer in England, and one of the top leagues in the world
Promotion/Relegation - something virtually unknown/unexperienced by the average american sports fan: a team finishing in the top spot (or two, depending on the league) at the end of the regular season automatically qualifies to go up to the next level for the following season, as well as the winner of a playoff between the third through sixth place teams (again, depending on the league). They are thus "promoted". A team finishing at the bottom (last one to four places, depending on the league) are relegated (sent down) to the next lower division, making way for the promoted teams. At the highest level, promotion and relegation are worth millions of dollars (well, pounds sterling, to be truthful) to each team.
Fixtures - what we call the schedule
F.C. (or FC) - literally, Football Club, as in Arsenal F.C.
If you ever decide to follow an English team, the Arsenal should be your choice!
I, too, was once a heathen unbeliever. I had the same experience that Robert T had regarding The Beautiful Game. We played it exactly once in high school gym class, knowing only that we could not pick it up unless we were the goalie (we think!). We did not know that you could actually pick the ball up for a throw-in after it went out-of-bounds, mainly because we were not given any out-of-bounds indicators.
We believed soccer was what those stupid Europeans did because they did not know how to play "real" football, aka "pointyball" to the soccer snobs. Little did we know that the South americans, Africans, Asians, and virtually every other country also played this game!
I started to become more aware of it through my children, as each one wanted to play since all their friends did. They started at the rec level, and progressed through to the club/travel teams. Also along the way they played indoor soccer, sort of hockey without sticks and skates, but with much more scoring than outdoor soccer. And hockey.
A professional soccer match is 90 minutes, more but not less, with each half being 45 minutes or thereabouts. Robert T's main concern is the "untimed" nature of the game, as he sees it. That quirk only exists at the professional level. At all other levels the clock is stopped for injuries, goals, and disciplinary actions (red or yellow cards). The game then resumes upon the official's signal, "and away we go", to quote Jackie Gleason (research project for MegaByte).
At the professional level, all power resides in the center official (referee) to determine not only what calls are to be made (fouls, out-of-bounds, etc.) but also what calls are not to be made (attempts to draw a foul by flopping, or overruling a call by the referee's assistant (formerly: linesman).
The center official is the sole determiner of how much, if any, stoppage time is added to the end of each playing period. Stoppage time (aka extra time, but not overtime) is given for things that normally would stop the clock, such as goals, disciplinary actions, warnings about time-wasting, penalty kicks, and the like. Instead of stopping the clock the match official wears two watches in most cases. One watch keeps the running time of each period; the other is actually stopped and started by the referee as deemed necessary, which is how he determines how much time should be added. You should know that if your team is behind, the added time is never enough, and is always way too much if your team is ahead.
As to why the clock is not stopped, it does not say in the rules, excuse me, the laws of the game, as they are officially known.
If there are further delays in stoppage time, the referee may add additional time to the announced stoppage time; this is known as Added Extra Time (AET in the box score if a goal is scored or a card is given out).
If a goal is scored in stoppage time, it may be recorded in various ways in the box score, depending upon who is doing the write-up: (in the example below, Handsome Son scores a goal in stoppage time):
Handsome Son (90)
or
Handsome Son (93)
or
Handsome Son (90+3)
or
Handsome Son (93 AET)
The number designates the minute in which the goal was scored. If a goal comes moments before the referee is set to blow his whistle to end the match, it is reported by those wonderful wordsmiths, the British) as "Handsome Son scored a goal at the death as Arsenal shocked Manchester United 1-nil at the Emirates on Saturday."
The Emirates is the new stadium wherein Arsenal F.C. play their home matches, after many years at Highbury, a mile or so away, which is now an office and condo development.
"Nil" is the proper soccer term for a team not scoring a goal in a match; a 0-0 score is a nil-draw; a 1-1 match is a score-draw.
Various terms it is handy to know in order to make others think you know what you are about when it comes to soccer:
Draw - what we call a tie game, not to be confused with a "tie", meaning a match still to be played (Arsenal have a mouth-watering tie at Liverpool Saturday next (a week from Saturday)
Result - a win or draw ("We played hard and got a result, which is what we hoped for on the road.")
Training - soccer players do not practice, they train
Pitch - what we call the playing field
Match - what we call a game
Striker - what we call a forward, the main job of which is to score the goals
Boot - a soccer shoe, also what the Brits call the trunk of a car
Onion bag - slang term for the net, used quite often by ESPN's Tommy Smythe
Manager - what we call a coach
Chanting/singing - what the soccer fan does instead of having the type of cheerleader-directed organized cheering we are familiar with at football and basketball games; they may be directed both for an against an individual player, or toward the team as a whole. many are very, shall we say, colorful, in nature. Liverpool fans, at all matches home or away, pledge their support by singing "You'll Never Walk Alone", written by Liverpool fan Gerry Marsden of Gerry and the Pacemakers fame (another MegaByte research project). It is truly an amazing scene, very moving, as the entire crowd stand and sing the song. It gives me chills when I hear it, and I am not a Liverpool supporter.
The Beautiful Game - what soccer is when it is played as a free-flowing game, with skilled passing and defending and wondrous goals being scored. It is also known as being "on song" when a team does it for long periods of a match.
Cynical - a description of an outmanned team whose game plan is to bunker in on defense in an effort to contain a superior team's offense by purposeful fouling, clogging the passing lanes, and making almost no attempt to run an offense of their own. Cynical teams play for a draw and hope to get a lucky break to score and take away a 1-0 win. Scoring a goal in such a manner is called "against the run of play".
Howler - a horrendous gaffe, usually made by a goalie (keeper) that results in an opponent scoring a goal, when by all rights the keeper should have made an easy stop. Witness England's Robert Green gifting the USA an easy goal in their recent World Cup match, for which he was (rightly) excoriated by the British sporting press.
Table - the league table is what we call the standings
The Prem - the Premiership, aka the English Premier League, the top level of soccer in England, and one of the top leagues in the world
Promotion/Relegation - something virtually unknown/unexperienced by the average american sports fan: a team finishing in the top spot (or two, depending on the league) at the end of the regular season automatically qualifies to go up to the next level for the following season, as well as the winner of a playoff between the third through sixth place teams (again, depending on the league). They are thus "promoted". A team finishing at the bottom (last one to four places, depending on the league) are relegated (sent down) to the next lower division, making way for the promoted teams. At the highest level, promotion and relegation are worth millions of dollars (well, pounds sterling, to be truthful) to each team.
Fixtures - what we call the schedule
F.C. (or FC) - literally, Football Club, as in Arsenal F.C.
If you ever decide to follow an English team, the Arsenal should be your choice!
Retail for the masses
I read recently an article as to the least and most favorite stores listed by consumers. Being in the retail industry, this greatly intrigued me. As I read however, the article was not what it claimed it would be but more of a complaint list about stores in general.
I have been a retail manager for nearly thirty years. In this blog I long ago decided I would neither mention my company by name, promote it or complain about it. It does however give me insight into how retailers do business in this day and age and one of the aspects of my company is they truly want a customer service ethic in their staffs. If you don't get it it is more the fault of that particular store than the company as a whole.
That being said, one of the complaints listed in the article was the lack of customer service. The author stated stores do nothing more than train cashiers and spies to catch thieves. Also stated was retailers cut staff and only bring in lower quality merchandise to keep prices low.
Well, mister author of the article, that has happened as a direct result of what the consumer has wanted over the years. Consumers long ago made the decision to shop at places that had the cheapest prices. Unfortunately, cheaper prices means lower quality. Years ago I worked for an independent hardware store. People would routinely come in to get our advise on how to fix a problem, kill a weed, grow grass or paint their house. They would then leave and go to the big-box retailer and buy a product that was cheaper, not spending their dollars with us. This was a common trend which is why the local hardware store was forced to go out of business. Large retailers are able to buy cheaper in bulk than can a local business but that doesn't mean they put their dollars into better product. Then the local guy is there to pick up the pieces when things go wrong, and they do that a lot.
As for service? The consumer doesn't want service. They want someone to complain to. They buy cheap goods and want someone to complain to when the shirt rips, fades or the part fails. Customers buy at mass marketers because the price is cheap. I had a customer that complained yesterday that he was unable to use a coupon that expired two months ago. Customers only want what they want. If you bought a cable six months ago, no you can't return it, it now belongs to you and not my store. I don't care it you have a receipt. It's yours, sell it at a yard sale.
Even lower pricing doesn't stop the flow of thievery. Retail theft runs in the billions and billions of dollars yearly. Stores are forced to combat this in some manner and it invariably involves electronic deterrents and staff that must work to keep the merchandise inside the store.
Consumers have made their choices and now must learn to live with the consequences. If you want service, go to a store that offers it but don't be rude or argumentative to their staff. They are there to help you and solve your issues. Remember they are your problems, not theirs. Don't make it out to be their fault.
As for the painting thing: if you ever actually read the back of a paint can and did what the manufacturers say to do to apply paint properly, I'll bet 75% of people would then hire a painter. Read a paint can someday, the instructions are there for a reason.
I have been a retail manager for nearly thirty years. In this blog I long ago decided I would neither mention my company by name, promote it or complain about it. It does however give me insight into how retailers do business in this day and age and one of the aspects of my company is they truly want a customer service ethic in their staffs. If you don't get it it is more the fault of that particular store than the company as a whole.
That being said, one of the complaints listed in the article was the lack of customer service. The author stated stores do nothing more than train cashiers and spies to catch thieves. Also stated was retailers cut staff and only bring in lower quality merchandise to keep prices low.
Well, mister author of the article, that has happened as a direct result of what the consumer has wanted over the years. Consumers long ago made the decision to shop at places that had the cheapest prices. Unfortunately, cheaper prices means lower quality. Years ago I worked for an independent hardware store. People would routinely come in to get our advise on how to fix a problem, kill a weed, grow grass or paint their house. They would then leave and go to the big-box retailer and buy a product that was cheaper, not spending their dollars with us. This was a common trend which is why the local hardware store was forced to go out of business. Large retailers are able to buy cheaper in bulk than can a local business but that doesn't mean they put their dollars into better product. Then the local guy is there to pick up the pieces when things go wrong, and they do that a lot.
As for service? The consumer doesn't want service. They want someone to complain to. They buy cheap goods and want someone to complain to when the shirt rips, fades or the part fails. Customers buy at mass marketers because the price is cheap. I had a customer that complained yesterday that he was unable to use a coupon that expired two months ago. Customers only want what they want. If you bought a cable six months ago, no you can't return it, it now belongs to you and not my store. I don't care it you have a receipt. It's yours, sell it at a yard sale.
Even lower pricing doesn't stop the flow of thievery. Retail theft runs in the billions and billions of dollars yearly. Stores are forced to combat this in some manner and it invariably involves electronic deterrents and staff that must work to keep the merchandise inside the store.
Consumers have made their choices and now must learn to live with the consequences. If you want service, go to a store that offers it but don't be rude or argumentative to their staff. They are there to help you and solve your issues. Remember they are your problems, not theirs. Don't make it out to be their fault.
As for the painting thing: if you ever actually read the back of a paint can and did what the manufacturers say to do to apply paint properly, I'll bet 75% of people would then hire a painter. Read a paint can someday, the instructions are there for a reason.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
FIFA Fi Fo Fum
Growing up I played many sports, however I was never a dominant athlete. But to this day sports holds a great interest for me. With the World Cup thrust upon us in the past few weeks I have done something I never thought I would do. I actually watched a soccer game or two.
Now, being a novice I have no idea of what the rules actually are. I grew up in and age where no one played the game, no schools had even a club team and any knowledge of the sport was left to gym class. Leaving learning up to gym class is about the same a hoping the Post Office gets it right. Likely, it won't happen. As soccer, or shall I say, futball has taken hold it was originally a game played by those who were not able to make the teams for more legitimate sports. Over the years that has changed and some of the better athletes in schools have taken to the game. Hence, as I have aged, soccer has crept into noteworthiness.
This past week I was able to watch games alongside the soccer aficionado North of 50 and one of his nephews. Said N of 50 has played and coached for years even into his fifth decade. Nephew has played extensively and seems to know the game in and out. Of course, since I know virtually nothing of the game I must take their word for the fact that they know what they are talking about.
First off, I don't see a reason to have a timed sport that when time expires the game is not over. Soccer has an untimed overtime. It's idea is there is lost time for things like injuries and penalty cards. Here's a novel idea, stop the clock. Most of what I watched was what I expected, seemingly random kicks of the ball sending it up and down the field. It wasn't until I started relating it to hockey that it seemed to make any sense at all. Germany was the only team I saw that seemed to have any type of coordinated offense. They used a short, tight 'passing' game to move the ball in close. A strategy, I surmised.
For having the world in its grasp I was disappointed in the quality of the announcers. This is soccer's biggest stage and the soccer elite have been trying to build it up in the US of A for many years. I was hoping for more detailed explanations of strategies and was left flat with none forthcoming. Fortunately for me I had N of 50 and nephew there to help me through some of the finer points.
All in all it was interesting as it is something I have never watched before. I have my criticisms such as athletes flopping around like a wounded duck at the slightest 'foul'. If that happened in American football every player would be flat on his back at the end of each play. Suck it up and play, boys! No blood no foul. I was also struck by the quality of officiating. For the biggest stage to have some of the poor calls is unacceptable. This isn't high school. You have an entire globe of referees to pick from. Pick the right ones.
Lastly, I doubt that this will ever become a game I will be interested in more than once every four years. It's like the Olympics, some of it is entertaining but I don't watch the slalom events more than twice a decade. I'll root for the US and hope for a positive outcome.
Now, being a novice I have no idea of what the rules actually are. I grew up in and age where no one played the game, no schools had even a club team and any knowledge of the sport was left to gym class. Leaving learning up to gym class is about the same a hoping the Post Office gets it right. Likely, it won't happen. As soccer, or shall I say, futball has taken hold it was originally a game played by those who were not able to make the teams for more legitimate sports. Over the years that has changed and some of the better athletes in schools have taken to the game. Hence, as I have aged, soccer has crept into noteworthiness.
This past week I was able to watch games alongside the soccer aficionado North of 50 and one of his nephews. Said N of 50 has played and coached for years even into his fifth decade. Nephew has played extensively and seems to know the game in and out. Of course, since I know virtually nothing of the game I must take their word for the fact that they know what they are talking about.
First off, I don't see a reason to have a timed sport that when time expires the game is not over. Soccer has an untimed overtime. It's idea is there is lost time for things like injuries and penalty cards. Here's a novel idea, stop the clock. Most of what I watched was what I expected, seemingly random kicks of the ball sending it up and down the field. It wasn't until I started relating it to hockey that it seemed to make any sense at all. Germany was the only team I saw that seemed to have any type of coordinated offense. They used a short, tight 'passing' game to move the ball in close. A strategy, I surmised.
For having the world in its grasp I was disappointed in the quality of the announcers. This is soccer's biggest stage and the soccer elite have been trying to build it up in the US of A for many years. I was hoping for more detailed explanations of strategies and was left flat with none forthcoming. Fortunately for me I had N of 50 and nephew there to help me through some of the finer points.
All in all it was interesting as it is something I have never watched before. I have my criticisms such as athletes flopping around like a wounded duck at the slightest 'foul'. If that happened in American football every player would be flat on his back at the end of each play. Suck it up and play, boys! No blood no foul. I was also struck by the quality of officiating. For the biggest stage to have some of the poor calls is unacceptable. This isn't high school. You have an entire globe of referees to pick from. Pick the right ones.
Lastly, I doubt that this will ever become a game I will be interested in more than once every four years. It's like the Olympics, some of it is entertaining but I don't watch the slalom events more than twice a decade. I'll root for the US and hope for a positive outcome.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Give us your best guess
The recent news concerning the oil mess in the gulf gives me another burst of ammunition concerning scale. Their issue is how much oil is spewing from the broken pipe in the sea floor? The problem is, no one actually knows. It's a matter of scale that, either no one can wrap their brain around, or, the equipment tasked to measure the flow is not capable of doing so accurately. That is assuming the equipment is working, or that it actually exists in the first place.
We see this problem in nearly all areas in our daily lives. Consider this. How often do you hear about a publicly funded project, a building repair let's say that actually comes in on time and at budget? It is a feat rarely accomplished. Often the time frame proves unwieldy or the price has skyrocketed beyond belief. If the companies that actually do this for a living can't get the estimates correct, how can we trust the measurements for anything that gets done? Aren't they the 'experts' after all?
How can a company such as Boeing/General Dynamics et al, that is in the defense contracting business for decades not be able to project the costs of producing a 'next generation fighter'? Every ten years it seems the next plane is offered and when it is finally produced it is billions and billions (say that like Carl Sagan) over cost. What have they learned about building these planes in the past? Apparently nothing at least respectful of accounting.
Perhaps no one actually keeps track of how much it cost to 'do it the last time'. Is it possible that there is no way to accurately track costs on such a scale? It is one thing to be off three to five percent on cost projections but to have a project fifty or more percent above a bid is absurd. If you submit a bid at a particular cost shouldn't you have to come in at that cost? If you can't, it shouldn't cost the taxpayers the balance, it should come from the coffers of the company that is doing the work. If the bid was wrong, that's a 'your problem'. How much would we save by doing business that way? Well, RT, the contractor would just cut corners to come under price, you say. I would rather pay for inspectors that dog their heels daily than pay for the billions and billions of cost overruns on all these projects. I'm fairly certain it would be cost effective in the long run. If you can't project the accurate costs of a project that costs billions of dollars how can you even be certain the monetary value of the company that is producing the work? Why would I trust that number?
It's likely the way it is done currently is a group sits in a large room with a big conference table and just guesses at what the number is. The bigger the table the more potent they feel. Either that or they throw darts. Quite frankly, billions and billions doesn't make sense to the brain and therefore the number becomes meaningless which is something the brain can easily grasp. There are numbers and sizes that are just too large for the brain to comprehend.
That leads to the next question, where is all the missing matter in the universe? I'm sure we have a great answer to that one. (Dark matter and dark energy, it's dark so you can't see it. That's a safe out isn't it?)
We see this problem in nearly all areas in our daily lives. Consider this. How often do you hear about a publicly funded project, a building repair let's say that actually comes in on time and at budget? It is a feat rarely accomplished. Often the time frame proves unwieldy or the price has skyrocketed beyond belief. If the companies that actually do this for a living can't get the estimates correct, how can we trust the measurements for anything that gets done? Aren't they the 'experts' after all?
How can a company such as Boeing/General Dynamics et al, that is in the defense contracting business for decades not be able to project the costs of producing a 'next generation fighter'? Every ten years it seems the next plane is offered and when it is finally produced it is billions and billions (say that like Carl Sagan) over cost. What have they learned about building these planes in the past? Apparently nothing at least respectful of accounting.
Perhaps no one actually keeps track of how much it cost to 'do it the last time'. Is it possible that there is no way to accurately track costs on such a scale? It is one thing to be off three to five percent on cost projections but to have a project fifty or more percent above a bid is absurd. If you submit a bid at a particular cost shouldn't you have to come in at that cost? If you can't, it shouldn't cost the taxpayers the balance, it should come from the coffers of the company that is doing the work. If the bid was wrong, that's a 'your problem'. How much would we save by doing business that way? Well, RT, the contractor would just cut corners to come under price, you say. I would rather pay for inspectors that dog their heels daily than pay for the billions and billions of cost overruns on all these projects. I'm fairly certain it would be cost effective in the long run. If you can't project the accurate costs of a project that costs billions of dollars how can you even be certain the monetary value of the company that is producing the work? Why would I trust that number?
It's likely the way it is done currently is a group sits in a large room with a big conference table and just guesses at what the number is. The bigger the table the more potent they feel. Either that or they throw darts. Quite frankly, billions and billions doesn't make sense to the brain and therefore the number becomes meaningless which is something the brain can easily grasp. There are numbers and sizes that are just too large for the brain to comprehend.
That leads to the next question, where is all the missing matter in the universe? I'm sure we have a great answer to that one. (Dark matter and dark energy, it's dark so you can't see it. That's a safe out isn't it?)
Saturday, June 12, 2010
The Property Line
My next door neighbor, I'll call him Cleveland as that is from whence he hails, has decided to erect a fence around his yard. The old expression is a good fence makes good neighbors. I don't know that I completely agree with the logic, but...
Certain fences have specific uses. If you have a swimming pool you must have it protected by a fence, and a specific type at that. If you live in a sub-division you have to get approval to put one up. I doubt that Cleveland will go that route. He is a singular minded fellow with a disdain for seeking approvals. Other fences are useful as they keep some things in, such as animals on a farm. You can't have packs or herds of goats, pigs and cows running wild across rural America.
Other fences keep things out. Some keep out thieves while keeping your property inside and protected. It doesn't keep things dry, however. Many older urban areas have fences both front and back. Some poorer areas do as well, and in much of the video seen on 'Cops'. When you think of those, it doesn't keep the bad guys out but it does make for some interesting chase scenes.
Fences run the gamut of style and design from tall and extravagant to short and wiry. It seems no matter what type one decides on there will be the never-ending maintenance and upkeep. It has to be washed, stained, painted and repaired.
I wish Cleveland well with his upcoming venture, one which I likely will get sucked into helping with. He is a good neighbor who doesn't need a fence to be one.
Certain fences have specific uses. If you have a swimming pool you must have it protected by a fence, and a specific type at that. If you live in a sub-division you have to get approval to put one up. I doubt that Cleveland will go that route. He is a singular minded fellow with a disdain for seeking approvals. Other fences are useful as they keep some things in, such as animals on a farm. You can't have packs or herds of goats, pigs and cows running wild across rural America.
Other fences keep things out. Some keep out thieves while keeping your property inside and protected. It doesn't keep things dry, however. Many older urban areas have fences both front and back. Some poorer areas do as well, and in much of the video seen on 'Cops'. When you think of those, it doesn't keep the bad guys out but it does make for some interesting chase scenes.
Fences run the gamut of style and design from tall and extravagant to short and wiry. It seems no matter what type one decides on there will be the never-ending maintenance and upkeep. It has to be washed, stained, painted and repaired.
I wish Cleveland well with his upcoming venture, one which I likely will get sucked into helping with. He is a good neighbor who doesn't need a fence to be one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)