Although those who know me personally know my political beliefs, I typically try not to share them in print because it is nearly impossible to hold meaningful debate with those who may share a differing opinion without someone getting their feelings hurt over a misread sentence or misplaced punctuation.
But a story posted by the Associated Press this past Friday morning got my blood boiling. You might want to read it first at http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091016/ap_on_re_us/us_social_security_seniors then come back and read the rest of this blog entry.
(Jeopardy theme plays while you're off reading.)
Now that you're back, I hope you are as offended at the writer of that story as I am. It is the job of a journalist to give an unbiased account of the news. Nothing more, nothing less. People are supposed to form their own opinions based upon the facts presented. Going beyond those prinicples makes one a columnist or a blogger, not a reporter.
The title of the story certainly has truth in it. No COLA raise for senior adults on a fixed income will likely mean that many of them will have to cut some corners, particularly if they were budgeting for next year with a COLA raise in mind. Nothing surprising there since the COLA adjustments have been awarded every year since they were first authorized in 1975.
The story could have shown how seniors who were expecting the COLA raise may have to forgo a medical test or procedure they had planned to take, or maybe that they might have to switch to a cheaper prescription because they could not afford the copayment. That should be a legimitate concern of every American.
Nope. This story told the terrible tragedy of how 76-year-old Agnes Conti of Pembroke Pines, FL would not be able to afford any of the finer things in life since she was not getting a COLA raise this year. We were supposed to be drawn to tears because poor Agnes now must "settle" for clothing from Walmart instead of the "nice new clothes" she sees on QVC.
The last time I checked, Walmart was not considered a thrift store. They certainly cater to people looking for a bargain, but so do Target and K-Mart. Why didn't the reporter choose to mention those stores instead of (or in addition to) Walmart? Simple. Because people "understand" that the "less fortunate among us" must shop at Walmart or they cannot make ends meet. Many of the elite among us now view Walmart the same way some view soup kitchens - a place we would never willingly enter. Using Walmart as the example instead of any other store is supposed to tug at our heartstrings and make us feel that this poor lady is somehow being mistreated because she can't afford to shop at QVC or because she has to put a cheaper cut of meat into her pot roast. Now I'm no cook, but isn't one of the beauties of pot roast the fact that if properly prepared, it makes a lesser cut of meat taste more expensive?
The rest of the story is more of the same. Lucy Polieto can't afford steak, and has to prepare eggplant, chicken cacciatori and pasta fazool instead. The last time I checked, many an Italian restaurant owner made a decent living serving those dishes. And somehow all of that would have been rectified if the Social Security Administration had changed their rules and provided a COLA adjustment. Give me a break.
As you determine your position on this story, and the government's role in our lives in general, remember this: every penny the government spends comes from your pocket. Every penny. So make sure YOUR wallet can afford all of the programs the government is budgeting for 2010 and beyond. Otherwise you might have to settle for shopping at Walmart too.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Waiting to Exhale
I can still remember the notes my wife Karen hid around the house that led me to my 1988 Christmas present. I had asked for 82 "pieces of paper" that year. A pair of season tickets for the Orlando Magic's inagural season in the NBA (I didn't think to count the preseason games). When I finally found the hidden box, it had 82 pieces of paper in it; strips cut and torn from notebook paper, because the season tickets would not be printed for several more months. Section 227, Row S. Nosebleed to be sure, but I was going to be there when the curtain rose on the NBA in Orlando.
The night of the first preseason game came, and we were there early (anyone who knows me knows that I HAVE to be early to everything). I remember walking down to the floor to see my friend David Steele, who was about to provide the radio play-by-play for the very first game in Magic history. I also ran into another good friend, Bob Gardner, who was lucky enough to be the courtside statistician for Sunshine Network's TV coverage that night.
I was so envious. I had been involved in sports game administration in some form or fashion since I was in high school. This was one of the few times in my life that I would be not be sitting courtside for a sporting event. Reluctantly, I let Karen lead me back up the steps so we could make our way to our upper bowl seats. We wandered around the concourse for a few minutes taking in the atmosphere. As we entered the tunnel to our section, (now) legendary PA Announcer Paul Porter barked, "May I have your attention please." I turned to Karen, laughed, and said in my best PA voice, "Would Tracy Clayton please report to courtside immediately." Not a millisecond later, Paul spoke the words that still bring chills up my spine today - "Would Tracy Clayton please report to the Sunshine Network table courtside."
Honest, those were his exact words. You can't make that kind of stuff up.
I set a new land speed record getting down to the floor. It turns out that one of the statisticians for Sunshine was not going to make the game and they were short one person. I was stunned. I was about to sit courtside for the very first NBA game in Orlando. And then I remebered that this night was about being a fan. This night was about appreciating Jimmy Hewett and Pat Williams and the DuPont family and everyone who had made this night a reality.
So I politely declined, and headed back to my upper bowl seat, wondering the whole time if I had lost my freaking mind. But once the players came out for warmups, and certainly by the opening tap, I realized I had made the right decision. As much as I enjoy being a part of the game, I realized that I also enjoy being a fan from time to time.
And so began my love affair with the Orlando Magic and the NBA. The next season I was hired by the Magic to be David's radio statistician, a gig that would eventually lead to a position in the Magic's IT department where I was still fortunate enough to work game nights. I traveled with the team for the London Games in 1993. I was there for the embarassing sweep by Indiana in the 1994 playoffs. I was there for the first game of the 1995 playoffs when we handed the Boston Celtics the worst lost in the history of their storied franchise (124-77). I personally felt the power of Shaquille O'Neal in that same series when he lost his balance while trying to jump the scorer's table for a loose ball and planted one of his Reebok's into my chest, sending me sprawling onto my back, with him on top of me.
I was there when Nick Anderson made the single greatest play in Magic history - the steal from Michael Jordan in the '95 conference semi-finals that led to a Horace Grant dunk to seal the win in game 1. (As an aside, David Steele's call of that play also goes down as the best radio call I've ever heard.) Magic fans started walking around with a swagger. We, for that moment anyway, were now among the NBA's elite. Our team was headed to the NBA Finals; a Championship banner was imminent; the parade route was being drawn.
And then came the loss that outsiders have used to define this team and the city of Orlando. You know which one I'm talking about. I was there. It was a bad loss, stunningly bad at the time. But I remember thinking a couple of hours after the game that it was no big deal. We'd regroup and get 'em back in game 2. We all know how that storied season ended, and Magic fans have been holding their breath ever since. Waiting for another chance to erase the notion that Orlando is nothing more than a "Mickey Mouse" town and that this franchise will forever be defined by the closing seconds of regulation in game 1.
(For the record, blowing a 20 point first half lead is the reason the Rockets won that game. But that's another blog for another day.)
For the past 14 years Magic fans have often felt how I imagine Cubs fans feel every year. Good teams getting beaten in the playoffs; losing playoff series after having what seemed to be insurmountable leads. Superstars bolting for brigher lights and greener pastures. Magic fans began to wonder if this team would ever regain the mojo that led them to the Finals in 1995.
Suddenly a draft choice we now call Superman, a couple of free agent signings later, and a rookie star-to-be and this Magic team has us wanting to believe again. This team became the first team ever to overcome a 3-2 deficit against the Celtics. This team DISMANTLED the Cleveland Cavaliers. This team was ready to erase 14 years of ghosts against the Los Angeles Lakers. Collectively, we started to think that we didn't need to hold our breath quite so hard. We peeked cautiously out of one eye; we dipped a toe into the water to see if it was safe to jump back in.
And then came the blow out in game 1 last Thursday night in LA, followed by the heartbreaking loss in game 2. 0-for-6. Would this team EVER win a game in the NBA Finals? Would Orlando again be defined by a missed shot? Every Magic fan took another deep breath and asked the basketball gods for just one thing - a home win in this series. A chance for the 17,000+ Magic fans in the Am plus the hundreds of thousands more watching on ABC or listening to the radio to exorcise 14 years of "what-ifs." Just one win. A chance to thank this team for their incredible heart and hustle as well as a chance to thank the hundreds of former players, coaches and staff that laid the groundwork for this season.
I know that I was on pins and needles all day yesterday. The opening tip couldn't come fast enough. I was working the Astros/Cubs game at Minute Maid Park, so I was relegated to following the score on NBA.COM until late in the fourth quater. I rushed to my car as soon as my game duties ended and found the Magic up by 4 with about 3 minutes to play. I don't remember any of the drive home, but I could probably recite Mike Tirico's play by play from memory.
Lakers trail by one, 102-101. I wondered if we'd be able to score to widen the lead? Lewis jumper from 23 feet...YES!
Could we get the defensive stop we needed? Kobe tries to split two defenders; Pietrus steals the ball and is fouled by Kobe...YES!! (Can anyone say, "Nick Anderson stole the ball! Nick Anderson stole the ball from Michael Jordan!")
Could we hit clutch free throws? Pietrus hits the second, and the Magic lead by 4 with 28.7 seconds remaining. Timeout LA...YES!!!
How much time are they going to put back on the clock? The officials huddle around the replay monitor to see how much time should go back on the clock. It looks like no more than two or three tenths of a second. Please let it be less than 0.3...PLEASE! 0.2 says Joe Crawford. All the Lakers can do now is attempt a long pass and a tip-in...Lewis hits the first free throw, and it's over because there's no way LA is going to tip-in a three point shot. YES!!!!! We WIN!!!!!
I was screaming at the radio while the celebration started at Amway Arena. At exactly 11:59 EDT, we could finally exhale. We were no longer the team that had never won a game in the NBA Finals. We were now the team that had handed LA their seventh consecutive NBA Finals road loss. We were the team that had set and NBA Finals record for field goal percentage in a game. We were the team that was within an eyelash of being ahead 2-1 in the series.
Phil Jackson's teams are 42-0 when they win the opening game of a series. So it would not be surprising to the basketball world if the Lakers won the next two games and closed this thing out at the Am. But I'm betting that we're about to see the team that defied the odds against the Celtics and the Cavs. I'm betting that this team can change that stat to read 42-1.
But regardless of the outcome, Magic fans can finally put the past behind them. WE have won a game in the NBA Finals. Breathe easy, Magic fans. This series is just getting started.
The night of the first preseason game came, and we were there early (anyone who knows me knows that I HAVE to be early to everything). I remember walking down to the floor to see my friend David Steele, who was about to provide the radio play-by-play for the very first game in Magic history. I also ran into another good friend, Bob Gardner, who was lucky enough to be the courtside statistician for Sunshine Network's TV coverage that night.
I was so envious. I had been involved in sports game administration in some form or fashion since I was in high school. This was one of the few times in my life that I would be not be sitting courtside for a sporting event. Reluctantly, I let Karen lead me back up the steps so we could make our way to our upper bowl seats. We wandered around the concourse for a few minutes taking in the atmosphere. As we entered the tunnel to our section, (now) legendary PA Announcer Paul Porter barked, "May I have your attention please." I turned to Karen, laughed, and said in my best PA voice, "Would Tracy Clayton please report to courtside immediately." Not a millisecond later, Paul spoke the words that still bring chills up my spine today - "Would Tracy Clayton please report to the Sunshine Network table courtside."
Honest, those were his exact words. You can't make that kind of stuff up.
I set a new land speed record getting down to the floor. It turns out that one of the statisticians for Sunshine was not going to make the game and they were short one person. I was stunned. I was about to sit courtside for the very first NBA game in Orlando. And then I remebered that this night was about being a fan. This night was about appreciating Jimmy Hewett and Pat Williams and the DuPont family and everyone who had made this night a reality.
So I politely declined, and headed back to my upper bowl seat, wondering the whole time if I had lost my freaking mind. But once the players came out for warmups, and certainly by the opening tap, I realized I had made the right decision. As much as I enjoy being a part of the game, I realized that I also enjoy being a fan from time to time.
And so began my love affair with the Orlando Magic and the NBA. The next season I was hired by the Magic to be David's radio statistician, a gig that would eventually lead to a position in the Magic's IT department where I was still fortunate enough to work game nights. I traveled with the team for the London Games in 1993. I was there for the embarassing sweep by Indiana in the 1994 playoffs. I was there for the first game of the 1995 playoffs when we handed the Boston Celtics the worst lost in the history of their storied franchise (124-77). I personally felt the power of Shaquille O'Neal in that same series when he lost his balance while trying to jump the scorer's table for a loose ball and planted one of his Reebok's into my chest, sending me sprawling onto my back, with him on top of me.
I was there when Nick Anderson made the single greatest play in Magic history - the steal from Michael Jordan in the '95 conference semi-finals that led to a Horace Grant dunk to seal the win in game 1. (As an aside, David Steele's call of that play also goes down as the best radio call I've ever heard.) Magic fans started walking around with a swagger. We, for that moment anyway, were now among the NBA's elite. Our team was headed to the NBA Finals; a Championship banner was imminent; the parade route was being drawn.
And then came the loss that outsiders have used to define this team and the city of Orlando. You know which one I'm talking about. I was there. It was a bad loss, stunningly bad at the time. But I remember thinking a couple of hours after the game that it was no big deal. We'd regroup and get 'em back in game 2. We all know how that storied season ended, and Magic fans have been holding their breath ever since. Waiting for another chance to erase the notion that Orlando is nothing more than a "Mickey Mouse" town and that this franchise will forever be defined by the closing seconds of regulation in game 1.
(For the record, blowing a 20 point first half lead is the reason the Rockets won that game. But that's another blog for another day.)
For the past 14 years Magic fans have often felt how I imagine Cubs fans feel every year. Good teams getting beaten in the playoffs; losing playoff series after having what seemed to be insurmountable leads. Superstars bolting for brigher lights and greener pastures. Magic fans began to wonder if this team would ever regain the mojo that led them to the Finals in 1995.
Suddenly a draft choice we now call Superman, a couple of free agent signings later, and a rookie star-to-be and this Magic team has us wanting to believe again. This team became the first team ever to overcome a 3-2 deficit against the Celtics. This team DISMANTLED the Cleveland Cavaliers. This team was ready to erase 14 years of ghosts against the Los Angeles Lakers. Collectively, we started to think that we didn't need to hold our breath quite so hard. We peeked cautiously out of one eye; we dipped a toe into the water to see if it was safe to jump back in.
And then came the blow out in game 1 last Thursday night in LA, followed by the heartbreaking loss in game 2. 0-for-6. Would this team EVER win a game in the NBA Finals? Would Orlando again be defined by a missed shot? Every Magic fan took another deep breath and asked the basketball gods for just one thing - a home win in this series. A chance for the 17,000+ Magic fans in the Am plus the hundreds of thousands more watching on ABC or listening to the radio to exorcise 14 years of "what-ifs." Just one win. A chance to thank this team for their incredible heart and hustle as well as a chance to thank the hundreds of former players, coaches and staff that laid the groundwork for this season.
I know that I was on pins and needles all day yesterday. The opening tip couldn't come fast enough. I was working the Astros/Cubs game at Minute Maid Park, so I was relegated to following the score on NBA.COM until late in the fourth quater. I rushed to my car as soon as my game duties ended and found the Magic up by 4 with about 3 minutes to play. I don't remember any of the drive home, but I could probably recite Mike Tirico's play by play from memory.
Lakers trail by one, 102-101. I wondered if we'd be able to score to widen the lead? Lewis jumper from 23 feet...YES!
Could we get the defensive stop we needed? Kobe tries to split two defenders; Pietrus steals the ball and is fouled by Kobe...YES!! (Can anyone say, "Nick Anderson stole the ball! Nick Anderson stole the ball from Michael Jordan!")
Could we hit clutch free throws? Pietrus hits the second, and the Magic lead by 4 with 28.7 seconds remaining. Timeout LA...YES!!!
How much time are they going to put back on the clock? The officials huddle around the replay monitor to see how much time should go back on the clock. It looks like no more than two or three tenths of a second. Please let it be less than 0.3...PLEASE! 0.2 says Joe Crawford. All the Lakers can do now is attempt a long pass and a tip-in...Lewis hits the first free throw, and it's over because there's no way LA is going to tip-in a three point shot. YES!!!!! We WIN!!!!!
I was screaming at the radio while the celebration started at Amway Arena. At exactly 11:59 EDT, we could finally exhale. We were no longer the team that had never won a game in the NBA Finals. We were now the team that had handed LA their seventh consecutive NBA Finals road loss. We were the team that had set and NBA Finals record for field goal percentage in a game. We were the team that was within an eyelash of being ahead 2-1 in the series.
Phil Jackson's teams are 42-0 when they win the opening game of a series. So it would not be surprising to the basketball world if the Lakers won the next two games and closed this thing out at the Am. But I'm betting that we're about to see the team that defied the odds against the Celtics and the Cavs. I'm betting that this team can change that stat to read 42-1.
But regardless of the outcome, Magic fans can finally put the past behind them. WE have won a game in the NBA Finals. Breathe easy, Magic fans. This series is just getting started.
Monday, May 25, 2009
Where INCONSISTENCY Happens...
Anyone who watched Game 3 of the Eastern Conference Finals between the Cavs and Magic last night know exactly where this blog will be going today.
Officiating in the NBA is broken. Badly. And it has to be fixed before fans start to believe the outcome of NBA games is determined the same way they are in the WWE: based on ratings and popularity.
Now don't get me wrong. I am NOT one of the conspiracy theorists that believes the NBA assigns officials to a specific game in order to try to dictate a specific outcome, nor do I believe that NBA officials are crooked or that games are fixed.
What I am saying, however, is that the officials have become so inconsistent and so accustomed to anticipating the outcome of plays that the integrity of the game is being jeopardized as a result. Last night's game provided a plethora of examples that help to prove my point. The most glaring was the foul called on Dwight Howard late in the 4th Quarter. Howard cleanly blocked LeBron James' three-point attempt, but was whistled for a foul. Replays from every angle plainly showed that the block was clean. There was no contact with LeBron. Why was the foul called? Because it looked like a foul. And because the player shooting was LeBron James. And I haven't even mentioned the non-foul call in the waning seconds of a game in the Denver/Dallas series where the NBA admitted the officials made a mistake - a mistake that likely cost Dallas the game.
So why is this happening? I think I have a likely answer.
Not too long ago, it was rare to find more than a handful of NBA players that could make highlight-reel plays. And even those players didn't do it more than a couple of times a game. But NBA athletes are now bigger, stronger and better than ever. A play that would have led SportsCenter 10 years ago might not even make the "Top 10 Plays of the Day" today. Dwight Howard can dunk on a 12 foot goal. A 12-foot goal! So why is it so hard to believe that he could block a LeBron James jump shot without commiting a foul?
Examples of blatenly blown calls exist in virtually every NBA game. I doubt that can ever be fixed because officials are human. But that's not the real issue with NBA officiating.
The real issue is inconsistency. Inconsistency around which violations are called, when violations are called and on whom those violations are called. I would wager that if you secretly polled NBA players, coaches and general managers that they would overwhelmingly cite inconsistency in officiating as the biggest issue facing the NBA today.
Just what, exactly, is inconsistent with NBA officiating? Here are few examples. You don't need a specific game reference. Take the video from any NBA game this season and I guarantee you will see every one of these examples called a different way at different times of the game.
1. The "hip check" illegal screen. In my opinion, this is the one foul that is called most inconsistently. I don't think anyone minds the offensive player making a little slide after setting the pick, but when he throws his hip into the player chasing the ball, that's a foul. Every damn time. But I've yet to figure out what criteria officials use for calling the illegal screen. If you can figure it out let me know.
2. The hand check. The rules about the hand check are very simple. If you use two hands on a player who doesn't have the ball, that's a foul. Yet, time and time and time and time again, we see this called when the ball is at the point and the play hasn't even started to develop while the bigs under the basket are involved in a sumo match for 42 minutes without a single whistle. And then, for no apparent reason, somebody gets called for the hand check in the paint with the game on the line.
3. Traveling. Now, I'm not talking about the extra step that everyone complains about. In fact, in most cases video shows that on the plays where people think a player traveled, he usually did not. No, what I'm talking about is the player that receives a pass on the wing while moving, takes two steps after catching the ball then changes pivot feet before taking a dribble. Now, I couldn't care less if they call that traveling or not. But what I DO care is that they call it the same way every time, every game.
So I've listed three examples that I promise you will see called differently in each of the remaining games of the NBA playoffs. But what's even more infuriating is that you're going to see each of those examples called differently within each of the games yet to be played. There is absolutely no excuse for that. A foul in the first minute of a game should be a foul in the last tenth of a second of a game. A foul called against the 12th man on the Clippers roster should be a foul when Kobe Bryant commits it. A non-call today should be a non-call tomorrow.
The only way the NBA can fix this issue is to first admit that the issue exists. At that point, the rules committe can determine how to address these issues. I think that one factor that the NBA is unwilling to admit is that speed and finesse of today's game has passed many of the veteran NBA officials by. They may know the rules and more importantly the intent of the rules, but they cannot accept that the skill of the players has advanced beyond the skills they saw when they were rookie officials. As a result, the whistle blows when it shouldn't because their years of experience with players of lesser skills leads them to believe a violation must have occurred. They are letting the NBA of the past interfere with the NBA of today.
Officials are human. I know. I was an amateur umpire for 26 years, and I know that I never called a game where I didn't make at least one mistake. But the one thing I always strived for was consistency. A strike in the top of the first inning was a strike in the bottom of the ninth inning. The NBA should demand the same of its officials, and should replace those that can no longer meet that standard.
The best athletes in the world deserve the best officials in the world. It's time for the NBA to do whatever it takes to make that happen.
Officiating in the NBA is broken. Badly. And it has to be fixed before fans start to believe the outcome of NBA games is determined the same way they are in the WWE: based on ratings and popularity.
Now don't get me wrong. I am NOT one of the conspiracy theorists that believes the NBA assigns officials to a specific game in order to try to dictate a specific outcome, nor do I believe that NBA officials are crooked or that games are fixed.
What I am saying, however, is that the officials have become so inconsistent and so accustomed to anticipating the outcome of plays that the integrity of the game is being jeopardized as a result. Last night's game provided a plethora of examples that help to prove my point. The most glaring was the foul called on Dwight Howard late in the 4th Quarter. Howard cleanly blocked LeBron James' three-point attempt, but was whistled for a foul. Replays from every angle plainly showed that the block was clean. There was no contact with LeBron. Why was the foul called? Because it looked like a foul. And because the player shooting was LeBron James. And I haven't even mentioned the non-foul call in the waning seconds of a game in the Denver/Dallas series where the NBA admitted the officials made a mistake - a mistake that likely cost Dallas the game.
So why is this happening? I think I have a likely answer.
Not too long ago, it was rare to find more than a handful of NBA players that could make highlight-reel plays. And even those players didn't do it more than a couple of times a game. But NBA athletes are now bigger, stronger and better than ever. A play that would have led SportsCenter 10 years ago might not even make the "Top 10 Plays of the Day" today. Dwight Howard can dunk on a 12 foot goal. A 12-foot goal! So why is it so hard to believe that he could block a LeBron James jump shot without commiting a foul?
Examples of blatenly blown calls exist in virtually every NBA game. I doubt that can ever be fixed because officials are human. But that's not the real issue with NBA officiating.
The real issue is inconsistency. Inconsistency around which violations are called, when violations are called and on whom those violations are called. I would wager that if you secretly polled NBA players, coaches and general managers that they would overwhelmingly cite inconsistency in officiating as the biggest issue facing the NBA today.
Just what, exactly, is inconsistent with NBA officiating? Here are few examples. You don't need a specific game reference. Take the video from any NBA game this season and I guarantee you will see every one of these examples called a different way at different times of the game.
1. The "hip check" illegal screen. In my opinion, this is the one foul that is called most inconsistently. I don't think anyone minds the offensive player making a little slide after setting the pick, but when he throws his hip into the player chasing the ball, that's a foul. Every damn time. But I've yet to figure out what criteria officials use for calling the illegal screen. If you can figure it out let me know.
2. The hand check. The rules about the hand check are very simple. If you use two hands on a player who doesn't have the ball, that's a foul. Yet, time and time and time and time again, we see this called when the ball is at the point and the play hasn't even started to develop while the bigs under the basket are involved in a sumo match for 42 minutes without a single whistle. And then, for no apparent reason, somebody gets called for the hand check in the paint with the game on the line.
3. Traveling. Now, I'm not talking about the extra step that everyone complains about. In fact, in most cases video shows that on the plays where people think a player traveled, he usually did not. No, what I'm talking about is the player that receives a pass on the wing while moving, takes two steps after catching the ball then changes pivot feet before taking a dribble. Now, I couldn't care less if they call that traveling or not. But what I DO care is that they call it the same way every time, every game.
So I've listed three examples that I promise you will see called differently in each of the remaining games of the NBA playoffs. But what's even more infuriating is that you're going to see each of those examples called differently within each of the games yet to be played. There is absolutely no excuse for that. A foul in the first minute of a game should be a foul in the last tenth of a second of a game. A foul called against the 12th man on the Clippers roster should be a foul when Kobe Bryant commits it. A non-call today should be a non-call tomorrow.
The only way the NBA can fix this issue is to first admit that the issue exists. At that point, the rules committe can determine how to address these issues. I think that one factor that the NBA is unwilling to admit is that speed and finesse of today's game has passed many of the veteran NBA officials by. They may know the rules and more importantly the intent of the rules, but they cannot accept that the skill of the players has advanced beyond the skills they saw when they were rookie officials. As a result, the whistle blows when it shouldn't because their years of experience with players of lesser skills leads them to believe a violation must have occurred. They are letting the NBA of the past interfere with the NBA of today.
Officials are human. I know. I was an amateur umpire for 26 years, and I know that I never called a game where I didn't make at least one mistake. But the one thing I always strived for was consistency. A strike in the top of the first inning was a strike in the bottom of the ninth inning. The NBA should demand the same of its officials, and should replace those that can no longer meet that standard.
The best athletes in the world deserve the best officials in the world. It's time for the NBA to do whatever it takes to make that happen.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Looks Can Be Deceiving
My son is huge WWE fan. I'm not sure why; I've raised him well and exposed him to great sports such as MLB, the NBA and NFL and even NASCAR. He got to travel with me on the Orlando Magic's team plane many years ago and I also took him to the NBA All-Star game in Phoenix a few weeks ago.
Wyatt starting watching WWE events on television a few years ago. I tried to explain to him that this was nothing more than dramatically staged theatre; that the outcome was decided long before the combatants entered the ring. But he was convinced that the punches were real and that the wrestlers were very strong and that's why getting hit over the head with a metal folding chair didn't do any harm.
I thought I was starting to get through to him, and then a very terrible thing happened. The WWE decided to hold Wrestlemania XXV along with WWE RAW (their weekly live TV event) right here in Houston. Wyatt begged for tickets for Wrestlemania, and my wife and I decided they would make a great Christmas present.
To make a long story as short as possible, we ended up getting him RAW tickets for his birthday (which is in early December), and made up a story that Wrestlemania was sold out. It was sold out, he just didn't realize that he was going to get those tickets a few weeks later.
As my wife and I discussed who would take Wyatt to these events, we determined that she would go with him to Wrestlemania on Sunday and he would take a friend to RAW Monday night. Wrestlemania was fun, but the seats I bought (which by the way, cost somewhere just south of a second mortgage) ended up being a little worse than they looked on the seat map. He was excited to be in the stadium with 72,000 of his closest friends, but he was disappointed that when someone got tossed out of the ring that his seats were too close to the floor to see that action live. Thank goodness for the Jumbotron.
Both Wyatt and Karen gave the event decent reviews, but I didn't hear the "Ohmygoshitwasawesome" that I had expected. My plan was working! His love affair with the WWE was about to end.
So this past Monday rolled around, and I was simply going to be the chauffeur, while Wyatt and his friend enjoyed WWE RAW. Well, his friend got sick, so guess who ended up using the second ticket.
We entered the arena just as the doors opened, and made our way to our lower bowl seats. It turned out that ole Dad did good on these tickets, as we were only about 100 feet from the corner of the ring, and high enough that we could see over the heads of the people on the floor. It was strangely quiet when we entered. No music and no lights were on other than the lights hanging above the ring.
I sat bored while we wated for the event to start. There was a pre-show that started at 7:30, which was an undercard of two bouts with wrestlers I'd never heard of. They were entertaining, but I was still wondering why I was there. As 8:00 got nearer, you could feel the energy in the Toyota Center starting to build. Right before we went live on USA Network, we were told that the main event would be a tag-team match featuring 10 WWE superstars, including John Cena, who had won the big title match the previous evening. Cena was probably only one of two or three wrestlers in the world I could pick out of a lineup, so that got me out of my seat.
8:00 came just a few seconds later, and we saw the TV opening credits on the big screen. Randy Orton came out to a deafening roar of boos from the 18,000 plus in the arena, and the drama began.
At about 8:02, I was hooked. I unashamedly became a WWE fan, and I realized why millions of people all over the world follow this "sport" so closely.
For the uninitiated, the WWE is not like wrestling of yesteryear. This is a polished machine that provides an incredible night of -dare I say it- family-friendly entertainment (ok, the scantily dressed WWE Diva's make that a stretch, but that's the only thing that stretches the bounds of decency). There was no profanity. There were no obscene gestures. There were no offensive signs (every sign is checked prior to entering the arena).
Yes, the matches are rigged, and yes, at times it can be comical to watch. But when your "guy" pins his opponent to win a match, you will be on your feet. I was. Repeatedly.
Between the early matches I wondered why I had become so mesmerized by something I had dismissed as trailer-trash fodder less than an hour before. And then it hit me.
The last letter in WWE stands for entertainment. "Wrestling" is simply the vehicle by which they provide that entertainment. What I saw was an incredibly scripted soap opera combined with blockbuster movie-grade stunt work and circus acrobatics. Villians and heroes, only their battleground is inside a 20 by 20 foot square.
Looks can be deceiving, indeed.
Wyatt starting watching WWE events on television a few years ago. I tried to explain to him that this was nothing more than dramatically staged theatre; that the outcome was decided long before the combatants entered the ring. But he was convinced that the punches were real and that the wrestlers were very strong and that's why getting hit over the head with a metal folding chair didn't do any harm.
I thought I was starting to get through to him, and then a very terrible thing happened. The WWE decided to hold Wrestlemania XXV along with WWE RAW (their weekly live TV event) right here in Houston. Wyatt begged for tickets for Wrestlemania, and my wife and I decided they would make a great Christmas present.
To make a long story as short as possible, we ended up getting him RAW tickets for his birthday (which is in early December), and made up a story that Wrestlemania was sold out. It was sold out, he just didn't realize that he was going to get those tickets a few weeks later.
As my wife and I discussed who would take Wyatt to these events, we determined that she would go with him to Wrestlemania on Sunday and he would take a friend to RAW Monday night. Wrestlemania was fun, but the seats I bought (which by the way, cost somewhere just south of a second mortgage) ended up being a little worse than they looked on the seat map. He was excited to be in the stadium with 72,000 of his closest friends, but he was disappointed that when someone got tossed out of the ring that his seats were too close to the floor to see that action live. Thank goodness for the Jumbotron.
Both Wyatt and Karen gave the event decent reviews, but I didn't hear the "Ohmygoshitwasawesome" that I had expected. My plan was working! His love affair with the WWE was about to end.
So this past Monday rolled around, and I was simply going to be the chauffeur, while Wyatt and his friend enjoyed WWE RAW. Well, his friend got sick, so guess who ended up using the second ticket.
We entered the arena just as the doors opened, and made our way to our lower bowl seats. It turned out that ole Dad did good on these tickets, as we were only about 100 feet from the corner of the ring, and high enough that we could see over the heads of the people on the floor. It was strangely quiet when we entered. No music and no lights were on other than the lights hanging above the ring.
I sat bored while we wated for the event to start. There was a pre-show that started at 7:30, which was an undercard of two bouts with wrestlers I'd never heard of. They were entertaining, but I was still wondering why I was there. As 8:00 got nearer, you could feel the energy in the Toyota Center starting to build. Right before we went live on USA Network, we were told that the main event would be a tag-team match featuring 10 WWE superstars, including John Cena, who had won the big title match the previous evening. Cena was probably only one of two or three wrestlers in the world I could pick out of a lineup, so that got me out of my seat.
8:00 came just a few seconds later, and we saw the TV opening credits on the big screen. Randy Orton came out to a deafening roar of boos from the 18,000 plus in the arena, and the drama began.
At about 8:02, I was hooked. I unashamedly became a WWE fan, and I realized why millions of people all over the world follow this "sport" so closely.
For the uninitiated, the WWE is not like wrestling of yesteryear. This is a polished machine that provides an incredible night of -dare I say it- family-friendly entertainment (ok, the scantily dressed WWE Diva's make that a stretch, but that's the only thing that stretches the bounds of decency). There was no profanity. There were no obscene gestures. There were no offensive signs (every sign is checked prior to entering the arena).
Yes, the matches are rigged, and yes, at times it can be comical to watch. But when your "guy" pins his opponent to win a match, you will be on your feet. I was. Repeatedly.
Between the early matches I wondered why I had become so mesmerized by something I had dismissed as trailer-trash fodder less than an hour before. And then it hit me.
The last letter in WWE stands for entertainment. "Wrestling" is simply the vehicle by which they provide that entertainment. What I saw was an incredibly scripted soap opera combined with blockbuster movie-grade stunt work and circus acrobatics. Villians and heroes, only their battleground is inside a 20 by 20 foot square.
Looks can be deceiving, indeed.
Monday, February 2, 2009
Slower Traffic Keep Right
Time to get on my soapbox for one of my top pet peeves - people who refuse to move out of the passing lane on the freeway.
If you've driven on the freeway, then you've probably seen the signs posted fairly frequently that read "Slower Traffic Keep Right" or "Left Lane Is For Passing Only." Believe it or not, those signs aren't posted just to keep the TxDOT sign painters busy. They are there because there is a LAW that requires slower traffic to move right for faster traffic.
Now I'm not talking about moving over when you're making a legitimate attempt to pass a vehicle in the right lane. Nor am I talking about moving over when there is so much traffic that nobody can really pass anyone. What I'm talking about are the idiots that believe that they can drive in whatever lane they choose, regardless of the speed of the vehicles around them. If you fall into that category, then consider yourself one of the idiots. You have absolutely no valid argument you can make for driving in the left lane when an open lane is available to your right. None, nada, zip. Go ahead - I dare you to make a valid argument. I'll promise you that I can defeat whatever lame excuse you come up with.
Many people believe that as long as they are doing the posted speed, then they do not have to yield for faster traffic unless that traffic happens to be an emergency vehicle. Those people would be wrong. The law says slower traffic must yield to the right. There are no caveats for how fast you are going vs. the vehicle that is coming up behind you in the left lane. The left lane is for passing, 100% of the time.
How many times have you seen what appears to be bumper to bumper traffic ahead of you only to find when you come over the top of a hill that there are cars driving the exact same speed in every lane with about a half-mile of open road in front of them? No? You've never experienced that? Then you must be one of the idiots I mentioned above that does not have the courtesy to get your slow you-know-what out of the left lane.
Have you also noticed the people who weave in and out of traffic trying to gain one or two spots in traffic? Yes, they are just as idiotic as those people blocking the left lanes, but hey, if you weren't driving in the left lane, then maybe there would be fewer reasons for them to weave and bob and drive the rest of us crazy.
So the next time you have people giving you the one-finger salute or checking their horn volume as they pass you by, try moving over a lane or two. You'll be a better driver for it, and maybe the guy that just blew by you at 80 MPH will have a Trooper with a laser detector waiting for him over the next hill. Then you'll get the last laugh after all.
If you've driven on the freeway, then you've probably seen the signs posted fairly frequently that read "Slower Traffic Keep Right" or "Left Lane Is For Passing Only." Believe it or not, those signs aren't posted just to keep the TxDOT sign painters busy. They are there because there is a LAW that requires slower traffic to move right for faster traffic.
Now I'm not talking about moving over when you're making a legitimate attempt to pass a vehicle in the right lane. Nor am I talking about moving over when there is so much traffic that nobody can really pass anyone. What I'm talking about are the idiots that believe that they can drive in whatever lane they choose, regardless of the speed of the vehicles around them. If you fall into that category, then consider yourself one of the idiots. You have absolutely no valid argument you can make for driving in the left lane when an open lane is available to your right. None, nada, zip. Go ahead - I dare you to make a valid argument. I'll promise you that I can defeat whatever lame excuse you come up with.
Many people believe that as long as they are doing the posted speed, then they do not have to yield for faster traffic unless that traffic happens to be an emergency vehicle. Those people would be wrong. The law says slower traffic must yield to the right. There are no caveats for how fast you are going vs. the vehicle that is coming up behind you in the left lane. The left lane is for passing, 100% of the time.
How many times have you seen what appears to be bumper to bumper traffic ahead of you only to find when you come over the top of a hill that there are cars driving the exact same speed in every lane with about a half-mile of open road in front of them? No? You've never experienced that? Then you must be one of the idiots I mentioned above that does not have the courtesy to get your slow you-know-what out of the left lane.
Have you also noticed the people who weave in and out of traffic trying to gain one or two spots in traffic? Yes, they are just as idiotic as those people blocking the left lanes, but hey, if you weren't driving in the left lane, then maybe there would be fewer reasons for them to weave and bob and drive the rest of us crazy.
So the next time you have people giving you the one-finger salute or checking their horn volume as they pass you by, try moving over a lane or two. You'll be a better driver for it, and maybe the guy that just blew by you at 80 MPH will have a Trooper with a laser detector waiting for him over the next hill. Then you'll get the last laugh after all.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Review Time!
I would guess that for most of you, annual performance review time is here. My review is scheduled for this Friday. As my manager was informing me of the impending review last week, I was reminded of the review experiences I've had throughout my career.
I have been fortunate that in almost 30 years worth of performance reviews, I've only had one review where I was given an overall rating of "unsatisfactory" or "needs improvement." And that leads me to the subject of this blog entry. Managers, supervisors and those who wish to manage people someday take note:
There should never be a negative surprise at review time. Let me repeat that, with emphasis:
THERE SHOULD NEVER BE A NEGATIVE SURPRISE AT REVIEW TIME!
Employees typically know prior to their review if they have met the goals outlined for them in the previous year. They know if they were timely on assignments and if they put in the number of hours expected of them. They know if they have helped or hindered their company with their performance. They know if their coworkers respect them.
So if employees know all of these things, what should they find out during their review?
My opinion on this is simple. Employees should receive confirmation of their performance during their review. If you've ever walked into your annual review meeting worrying about how your performance was going to be rated, then your manager or supervisor is not doing his job.
Review time is not the time to surprise an employee with the knowledge that their performance is unacceptable. A good manager gives continuous performance feedback throughout the year, both positive and negative. By doing so, employees can focus on correcting those items that need improvement as well as continuing in the knowledge that they are on track in other areas.
Surprises during a review should be positive. They should reinforce areas of strength so that employees know they are doing something right. Now that does not mean that a review should be all roses. If you've been duly warned and instructed about areas that need improvement, then it should come as no surprise when those shortcomings are documented in your review.
I'll never forget the only bad review I ever received. It was over fifteen years ago, yet I can remember every detail of the meeting as if it just happened. My immediate supervisor did a great job of giving me continuous feedback that year, as I wrote above. So when my review with her was held, there were no surprises on what was written in my review folder.
However, when I later met with my second level manager to complete the review, virtually every positive comment my supervisor had written had been redlined and replaced with negative comments about my performance. Not only was I dumbfounded, angry and confused, but my supervisor was clearly embarrassed for me as well.
I have to admit that I did not handle this news well. I challenged the manager as to why I was just hearing these negative comments for the first time, when everything I had heard throughout the previous year had been positive. The answer was that he had kept these comments to himself and did not share them with my supervisor until it was time to approve my formal review. And to top it off, the changes were not due to any documented facts or from any input from my coworkers or customers, they were simply his opinion.
I almost quit right then and there. But I knew deep inside that this was an anomaly; and that I should be as positive as possible. So I took the comments in stride, I apologized to the manager for not having met his expectations, and promised to work on those areas the next year.
After the meeting, my supervisor was almost in tears. She said she had been just as blindsided by what had just happened as I had been. She also promised to make sure that it did not happen again. And it didn't.
I can't be the only person who's had this experience because I constantly hear from friends and coworkers about how nervous they are about their review. So I offer this advice to each of you when you receive your review this year: If you have negative surprises in your review, challenge your management to be more proactive in 2009. If you don't know your performance is unacceptable, then how can you be expected to improve?
I don't expect any negative surprises this Friday when I have my review. I'll let you know Monday if that was the case.
I have been fortunate that in almost 30 years worth of performance reviews, I've only had one review where I was given an overall rating of "unsatisfactory" or "needs improvement." And that leads me to the subject of this blog entry. Managers, supervisors and those who wish to manage people someday take note:
There should never be a negative surprise at review time. Let me repeat that, with emphasis:
THERE SHOULD NEVER BE A NEGATIVE SURPRISE AT REVIEW TIME!
Employees typically know prior to their review if they have met the goals outlined for them in the previous year. They know if they were timely on assignments and if they put in the number of hours expected of them. They know if they have helped or hindered their company with their performance. They know if their coworkers respect them.
So if employees know all of these things, what should they find out during their review?
My opinion on this is simple. Employees should receive confirmation of their performance during their review. If you've ever walked into your annual review meeting worrying about how your performance was going to be rated, then your manager or supervisor is not doing his job.
Review time is not the time to surprise an employee with the knowledge that their performance is unacceptable. A good manager gives continuous performance feedback throughout the year, both positive and negative. By doing so, employees can focus on correcting those items that need improvement as well as continuing in the knowledge that they are on track in other areas.
Surprises during a review should be positive. They should reinforce areas of strength so that employees know they are doing something right. Now that does not mean that a review should be all roses. If you've been duly warned and instructed about areas that need improvement, then it should come as no surprise when those shortcomings are documented in your review.
I'll never forget the only bad review I ever received. It was over fifteen years ago, yet I can remember every detail of the meeting as if it just happened. My immediate supervisor did a great job of giving me continuous feedback that year, as I wrote above. So when my review with her was held, there were no surprises on what was written in my review folder.
However, when I later met with my second level manager to complete the review, virtually every positive comment my supervisor had written had been redlined and replaced with negative comments about my performance. Not only was I dumbfounded, angry and confused, but my supervisor was clearly embarrassed for me as well.
I have to admit that I did not handle this news well. I challenged the manager as to why I was just hearing these negative comments for the first time, when everything I had heard throughout the previous year had been positive. The answer was that he had kept these comments to himself and did not share them with my supervisor until it was time to approve my formal review. And to top it off, the changes were not due to any documented facts or from any input from my coworkers or customers, they were simply his opinion.
I almost quit right then and there. But I knew deep inside that this was an anomaly; and that I should be as positive as possible. So I took the comments in stride, I apologized to the manager for not having met his expectations, and promised to work on those areas the next year.
After the meeting, my supervisor was almost in tears. She said she had been just as blindsided by what had just happened as I had been. She also promised to make sure that it did not happen again. And it didn't.
I can't be the only person who's had this experience because I constantly hear from friends and coworkers about how nervous they are about their review. So I offer this advice to each of you when you receive your review this year: If you have negative surprises in your review, challenge your management to be more proactive in 2009. If you don't know your performance is unacceptable, then how can you be expected to improve?
I don't expect any negative surprises this Friday when I have my review. I'll let you know Monday if that was the case.
Friday, January 23, 2009
It's Good to See Me
Huh? What kind of title is that?
A very good friend of mine, Frank Louvre, used to greet me with that line every time we saw each other. At first, I thought it was sort of arrogant, but once I got to know Frank, I realized it fit his personality. It was his way of breaking the ice, and eventually became a way to let one know that he was happy to see you.
So, I guess my point is that I hope you will find this blog inviting, even if my side of the topic of the day might be diametrically opposed to yours. Also remember that it is typically difficult to read tone of voice and body language from the written word, and that often results in people getting offended or upset after reading something when that same wording wouldn't even cause a raised eyebrow when spoken aloud.
I hope I can find the time to post a new topic regularly. But for now, "It's good to see me!"
A very good friend of mine, Frank Louvre, used to greet me with that line every time we saw each other. At first, I thought it was sort of arrogant, but once I got to know Frank, I realized it fit his personality. It was his way of breaking the ice, and eventually became a way to let one know that he was happy to see you.
So, I guess my point is that I hope you will find this blog inviting, even if my side of the topic of the day might be diametrically opposed to yours. Also remember that it is typically difficult to read tone of voice and body language from the written word, and that often results in people getting offended or upset after reading something when that same wording wouldn't even cause a raised eyebrow when spoken aloud.
I hope I can find the time to post a new topic regularly. But for now, "It's good to see me!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)