Thursday, May 15, 2008

New Zealand Versus Engalnd 1st test




In just two hours the first cricket test against England will begin, (weather permitting) just for the record Im predicting a 1-0 series win to New Zealand.

UPDATE: DAY ONE LOOKS LIKES ITS GOING TO BE A WASHOUT. :-(
UPDATE2: AN EARLY LUNCH WILL BE TAKEN, ITS RAINING :-(

Saffron - A Further Update

Made the trip out to Ohariu Valley to meet Saffron in the flesh on our way to my parents for Graduation week. So, here are a selection of the pix I took. She's a dear little girl with plenty of attitude!





Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Why is this necessary

Senator Arlen Specter has called for an independent investigation (a la the Mitchell Commission) into the New England Patriots' videotaping practices, apparently dissatisfied with the inquiry conducted by Commissioner Roger Goodell. Specter is particularly upset with the fact that an attorney for the Patriots sat-in on Tuesday's meeting between Goodeel and former Patriots video assistant Matt Walsh and that Goodell's prior investigation was not candid or complete, was marred by a conflict of interest, and did not serve the public interest. Specter issued a Floor Statement on the matter.

I have asked this before and I will ask it again: Why does the NFL owe the public anything, other than what it believes is in its best business interests? And why does or should a member of the United States Senate care how a private entity conducts its business, so long as it is not violating any actual laws or any laws that Congress believes ought to be enacted? Reading the statement, Specter talks about sports as big business, the league's antitrust exemption, and the role-model status of professional athletes. But none of that justifies congressional involvement simply to ensure that the league is abiding by its own internal rules. And it certainly does not justify Congress trying to tell the NFL how to run its business--again, absent some actual law or legislative proposal.

College Education: Hold the Mayo

Here is an interesting article from the New York Times about O.J. Mayo, the “freshman” basketball talent at the University of Southern California. The article argues against the absurd age eligibility rule of the NBA enacted with an eye and ear toward what David Stern admits was the mutual back scratching interests of the NBA and the NCAA.

The beauty of the Rule, as revealed in the case of Mayo, is that it makes transparent the hypocrisy of big time college basketball. The requirement of one year of college, “one and done,” compels players, often from poor backgrounds, who are otherwise eligible to earn a living doing what they do best, to enroll in an institution of higher learning for one and a half semesters until their team exits the NCAA tournament. No less an ethicist than Bobby Knight has said, the rule is “the worst thing that’s happened to college basketball since I’ve been coaching.”

Unlike the NFL in the Clarett case, the NBA could not with a straight face argue that the purpose of the rule is to further the education of young athletes and to prepare them for life after a pro career. (Not that anyone believed the NFL in Clarett.) Instead, the purpose of the NBA’s rule is strikingly clear: it gives their scouts a full year of adequate competition to be able to judge the potential of the talent working for free on the farm.

More on Steroids....

Sarah Kellogg has an excellent piece in this month's issue of Washington Lawyer magazine, Juiced: Congress, Steroids, and the Law. Here are a few probing questions and comments from people she interviewed:

Washington Times sports columnist Tim Lemke:

“Most people look at sports simply as entertainment, and they don’t really get emotionally tied up in it. As long as sports leagues are doing something about the issue, I think fans are pretty content. Congress is sort of overreaching here with the Roger Clemens situation, which turned out to be over the top and not remotely connected to the original purpose here—protecting kids and public health.”

“Sports leagues can’t simply put in place policies as if it’s a dictatorship. Everything goes through collective bargaining. Most people understand that the steroids testing policies in place are pretty good, especially given the fact everything has to be approved by a union. The job of union leaders is to look out for their players and not to give too much away. They’ve had to walk a fine line there.”

“If baseball and sports are filled with people who are dishonest and cheating, is that affecting the public welfare? I’m not sure, but maybe it’s a question that’s worth asking.”

NFL Executive V.P., Harold Henderson:

“Why let steroid use be rampant down at Gold’s gym but legislate against it in sports leagues? If you want to do something about it, get it off the Internet. Ban the nonmedical use of it. Devote some resources to law enforcement and dry it up.”

Author of Freedomnomics and a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland, John Lott Jr.:

“We go and watch sporting events because of the amazing feats these guys are able to perform. If they’re able to do a bit better job with performance-enhancing drugs, then these athletes should be able to make the choice. They take risks all the time. We pay to watch them take those risks. Why are we interested in legislating against these risks but not against others?”

It is hard to hold it together on the outside when you are falling apart on the inside.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

I feel very ill at this moment. Stomach hurts, and I cant eat. I feel like throwing up.