We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
I wish tennis victors would not climb over the building One of the more annoying features of tennis today – certainly in the Wimbledon Men’s Finals – is how the victor often feels the urge to climb up the side of the stand after he has been declared the winner to embrace his family, girlfriend, mistress, personal trainer, etc. Last night, after winning the thrilling match against Federer, Nadal did all this, and then tried to climb all over the stand. I thought, “Christ, the idiot is going to fall off”. It would have been a bit tragic had this marvellous player suddenly injured himself in this way.
In future, Rafa, keep off the bloody stands.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Should a law be passed? “Players who have just played for nearly 5 hours and won a grand slam, please do not climb the stands”
Ridiculous. You will be suggesting yellow cards for football players who get too close to the fans next…..
Let them do what they want, and show some passion. Rafa is a grown man, not a kid who needs protecting! Im sure he can look after himself.
Enough bureaucracy.
Not as annoying as the way the anodyne Sue Barker “so you must be very happy” interview seems to have become more important than the trophy award itself.
I quite like it when these people go a bit mad. It shows they care.
Someone is a bit annoyed ‘casue Dagoes and another disgusting aliens keep winning Britain’s finest trophy…
I will forgive Nadal and Federer almost anything after that match though. Two champions of the highest order played at the tops of their games for over four hours. It was really wonderful to watch.
No. I was just venting. Any laws should be up to the club anyway, such as dress code, etc.
I must say I have been impressed by the use of technology in the matches, which seems to have removed a lot of the old hassles over dodgy line calls.
Didn’t Pat Cash start this annoying habit?
Personally I wish Nadal would wear a shirt with sleeves, I think it looks a bit common playing in a glorified vest. Still, not a bad match all things considered.
Why do you lot have to sound so querulous and peevish so often? Let the man celebrate for goodness sake…
This is exactly the sort of fake-spontaneous, pseudo-rebellious stuff that passes for individualism in today’s world; it has nothing to do with resisting bureaucracy.
Anyway, great match and even better to see the smirk wiped of Gavin Rossdale’s stupid face. =)
Then he noticed his own Royals (príncipe Felipe and princesa Leticia) were in another box and rushed through the roofs to receive their congratulations too.
Jonathan Pearce wrote:
The line calls are just as dodgy; it’s just that too many people have blind faith in the computer estimate (it’s not a replay, and please don’t call it that in my presence, as it’s one of the things that will send me into a blind rage….) and treat it as though it’s infallible.
If you watch tennis matches on clay, you’ll see that the ball leaves a mark every time it hits the court, and it’s not uncommon for the chair umpire to get down from the chair and inspect a mark, which 99.9% of the time will placate both players. Our mendacious Pat McEnroe, however, on finding that Hawkeye disagreed with the actual evidence of the mark on the court, had the idiotic gall to suggest the umpires were calling the wrong marks!
There have even been multiple incidents where the pretty picture showed the ball one way, and the word below gave the other answer.
Bang on the money Ted
Funny how Hawk-eye has never been installed at the French Open.
“It would have been a bit tragic had this marvellous player suddenly injured himself in this way.”
Gosh, and I thought that real libertarians were opposed to all notions of ‘elf’n’safety’
Yes, and hence they all cheer when someone breaks their neck, especially if it’s a marvelous tennis player.
No, libertarians are opposed to compulsory health and safety measures that trump basic common sense. That is a subtle point maybe, but crucial. I have no desire whatever to coerce people into taking care with their lives; at the same time, I do not see why you should object if I point out that X or Y is acting like a foolish idiot.
So, to continue the point, if a private club like the Wimbledon outfit passes a regulation saying that “tennis players shall not climb all over the stands”, then I do not see why it should not.
Yes, what Ted said with respect to Hawkeye. I don’t think it is appropriate to use computer models of this kind as part of the adjudication process in sport. They are not reliable, and they also open up rather worrying possibilities for corruption. (I do not support their use in cricket for judging LBW decisions either). Genuine photographic replays do perhaps have a role in some instances, but they are much more obviously fallible in cases where the photographers simply did not get a clear shot. Hawkeye on the other hand prentends to be infallible, and so much be better.
Michael:
At the US Open, they used to have super high-speed cameras trained on the lines of the main court, which the local broadcaster dubbed “Mac Cam” in honor of John McEnroe’s notorious temper with the chair umpires.
They have the problem that they can be blocked by the player, and provided a very grainy image during the night matches, but they did show real images of the ball landing.
Unfortunately, they seem to have removed the “Mac Cams” when Hawkeye came into effect. We can’t have evidence showing that Hawkeye gets it wrong, now, can we?
Interesting piece on Hawkeye here.
Learn to distinguish between the helmet and the helmet law, grasshopper.
It’s not as annoying (or un-Wimbledonish) as people calling him “Rafa” as if they hang out with him and his bizarre-looking childface down the local pub. It seems to be the Beeb’s newest habit, instead of using surnames like they should. Grumpy old man rant now over.