Posts by Yamis
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Again: Is everyone okay?, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
Oh, yeah cos we all grow Maple trees in the attic ;)
It's because of the opposite seasons you see between the hemispheres. The trees become confused if they are experiencing summer when it should be winter and vice versa so the growers of them were merely creating a controlled habitat for them. ;)
On a more serious note I donated some money last night to the Red Cross page which was linked to in the main post, and linked it today to facebook and elsewhere but noticed that it either wasn't loading, or else was very slow which I guess is due to the volume of traffic it's getting. Which is good ... kinda.
-
Hard News: Again: Is everyone okay?, in reply to Russell Brown,
A lighter moment … what sort of plants might the owner have been growing in the attic of this now-ruined house?
Those are definately young maple leaf trees.
I am not available to give evidence however.
-
Horse walks into a bar. Barman says "Why the long face?". Horse says, "I proposed but Ed said neigh".
That's the best I could do with horses and marriage. I need better material to work with.
-
Hard News: Gaying Out, in reply to Rich Lock,
once children and straights are excluded from the population.
What? When did we get voted off the island?
-
If you aren't getting the answers you are looking for you always shut the discussion down.
As a teacher I know something about this. :)
-
When we get name suppression there are enormous rumours and theories about who it might be.
What we have here is opinion suppression.
So I suggest we all speculate wildly and start all sorts of rumours about what Key's opinion is.
That'll get him to come out with it before the book.
I would kick things off but figure I'll offend too many people unintentionally :)
I'll go with the toned down, educated guess instead. Key believes in the freedom of people to choose their partners and that they should have roughly equal rights, but he's no homo, but he knows many and has no problem with them, just that he's not into that shit or anything, not that there's anything wrong with it, just that he's more comfortable with the ladies, or rather the lady, as he's happily married thank you very much, in a loving relationship with a lady, who's a woman, and he's a man, and mates with Richie McCaw.
OK, so kinda drifted down the other path there.
Yours truthfully (or not)
Yamis -
Field Theory: An important message for…, in reply to giovanni tiso,
(Which maybe takes us away from the point of Hadyn's post, which might have been (?) a comment on the exclusion of the world cup winning women's rugby team from Halberg consideration perhaps? On that front it might be worth noting that since 2001 women have won the supreme award six times out of ten.)
(all male) Rugby teams have won the team award 5 times out of the 24 times it has been awarded. 8 times the team that has won has been female, and once they were mixed (equestrian). A few yachting teams have won as well where there's in theory open entry to either sex. All the other teams were strictly male or female.
Amazingly rugby has only had a player or team win the Supreme Award 4 times out of a possible 60. You have to go back 23 years to when the ABs won it in 1987, before that it was won by Wilson Whineray in 1965, Don Clarke in 1959 and Ron Jarden in 1951.
Richie McCaw won the sportsman of the year this year for the first time but IMHO he should have won it about 5 times by now. The anti-rugby bias in the selecting has scuppered that though.
The ABs were one of the 6 nominations for World Sporting team of the year awards at the Laureus Awards along with the Spanish WC winners, the European Ryder Cup team, Inter Milan, LA Lakers, and the Red Bull formula 1 team. I guess the AW's only just missed out on a nomination ;)
-
Lot's of interesting points above, too many to comment on really. But I'll disagree slightly with you Amy in that people watch sport for a variety of reasons, to make out like there's only one reason is a bit presumptuous. I'll watch my team play to see them dismantle the opposition (ideally). As a Warriors supporter I'm far happier after they've pantsed somebody by 40 points than some error ridden nail-biter where they just got over the line.
If I'm a neutral observer I want to see top quality sport and if possible a really tight finish. But there's nothing worse than watching two teams I don't support playing out a horrible match with dropped passes, poor kicking, or finishing, bowling, shot selection, catching or whatever else.
Actually, in saying all that there's one exception I can think of.
Golf. There I find a perverse pleasure in seeing the best golfers in the world hitting it into dense rough, a lake, off a cliff, from one bunker to another, or onto the neighbouring fairway. A bit like the car crash aspect to motor racing.
In case anybody is keen though.
<advertisement> ;)
Womens Black Sticks are playing tonight at Lloyd Elsmore Park in Pakuranga against South Korea. The men play the same opponents this afternoon. Both games live on Sky Sport, coverage starting at 4pm for the men and 7pm for the women. Good to see the men are curtain-raisers :) -
Field Theory: An important message for…, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
I knew the White Ferns were playing because I listen to radio sport. If you are interested in watching womens cricket then go and find out when it's played, don't whinge because there was no full page ad in the local paper. I often go to watch club sport in my area and I have to go to the official website and find out the draws and who is playing, where, and when.
It ain't being broadcast on national TV or radio.
On "quality" I think it's important not to confuse it with "interesting", or "entertaining". For example, I often find games played by teams I am manageing or helping out with, or local teams I support more interesting or entertaining than professional games. But the quality is certainly far, far worse than the top stuff.
But in some instances the quality of womens sport is very good. The skill level and fitness is damn high and this is often evident in the number of spectators. ie womens tennis and netball.
How's the NZ mens netball team going?
-
Following on from giovanni...
If people want to get uptight about the lack of womens sport coverage I suggest they get off their butts and go watch some. There's nothing stopping people going down to local parks and watching females playing sport. There's nothing stopping people writing in to the local TV network and asking that they televise a womens sporting event. And it works, there's been several cases where networks have been pressured into covering events or picking up programmes on the back of public response.
But hell, they aren't charitable organisations. If it doesn't rate it ain't gonna get shown.
We all know that for the most part the quality of male sport is vastly superior (not always). So why watch something second rate (often far worse) simply because of their gender? Why not then televise primary school sports because that's a level playing field and it's ageist not to cover it. Why watch the Black Ferns win the WC when I know damn well that my local club senior mens side would beat them by a hundred points?
yours respectfully
Devils A.D. Vocate