Home | Away

Thursday, May 07, 2009

Random Thursday

Two things today.  One, I found this essay most diverting.  I mean, how can you not love an essay that begins,

With all the economic pain and consternation—surging unemployment, enormous corporate bankruptcy, trillions becoming the new billions—it’s easy to overlook the fact that tens of thousands of families have suddenly lost a great deal of the money they socked away to pay for college. They lost it because public officials told them to risk their children’s educational future in a casino run by idiots and thieves.

Read the whole thing, as they say on blogs.

Two, I went back and checked Ye Olde Rules of Hockey, which I haven’t consulted since I wrote this ancient post, and sure enough, there’s a provision in there that accounts for the seemingly inexplicable ruling on this play in game three of the Ducks-Red Wings series*:

78.5 Disallowed Goals—Apparent goals shall be disallowed by the Referee and the appropriate announcement made by the Public Address Announcer for the following reasons:

. . .

(xii) When the Referee deems the play has been stopped, even if he had not physically had the opportunity to stop play by blowing his whistle and even if the puck is in plain sight, in the crease, inches from the goal line, if the crease and goal line shall be those of the team from Disneyland.

There’s also a special rule for calling “interference” on Disneyland opponents even when they check Disneyland players who actually have possession of the puck.  I tell you, they think of everything!

56.1 Interference—A strict standard on acts of interference must be adhered to in all areas of the rink, except in Disneyland, where the Magic Kingdom will take you on an amazing journey into the world of imagination!

Go Wings.
______

* The commentary on the play is pretty good, except for the claim at 1:18 that “the whistle beats the puck into the net.” This is not true, as the replays show:  the puck crosses the line well before the whistle (see 1:20-1:21 and 1:30-1:31).  So it’s not a case in which the referee lost sight of a clearly-visible puck and blew the play dead before the goal was scored.  It’s a case in which the referee lost sight of a clearly-visible puck and intended to blow the play dead before the goal was scored even though the goal was scored before the whistle was blown.  One of the worst calls I’ve ever seen in my whole entire life.  Too bad it had to decide a playoff game, eh?

And so much for my Wittgensteinian argument in that ancient post.

Posted by Michael on 05/07 at 11:22 AM
(21) Comments • (0) TrackbacksPermalink
Page 1 of 1 pages