THIS AND THAT

The older I get, the more I like baseball, partly because I'm sick of the cheating in other pro sports. There simply is not that much on-the-field cheating in baseball. It's not possible. In other sports, however, the cheating is intentional and crude and disrespectful of the game itself.


When a basketball player is driving for the hoop and another player grabs his jersey in a way the ref can't see, I don't think, “Wow! What a wily old veteran!” Instead, I think the guy should be thrown out of the game and maybe banned for the rest of the season. Ditto the defensive back in football who knows he is not allowed to hold a pass receiver but does so anyway, cleverly, subtly. I hate those guys. Their sport has given them fame, prestige and tons of money, and now they are pissing on it.


                                                                         *


One consequence of a centralized and hierarchical organization is that it becomes difficult to evaluate lower-level members of the organization. Since all decisions are made at the top, the only performance measure on which underlings can be judged is their ability and willingness to follow orders. In a rigid hierarchy, this is an important quality, of course, but it provides no evidence of a talent for independent judgment. This is true even of important executives in the organization, those with responsibility for directing a large number of employees. They may be so constricted in what they can do with their minions, it can be difficult to evaluate them as decision-makers.
                                                               
                                                              *


Presidential debates would be much more civilized with a stage, two candidates, two microphones, and no moderator. Any rules would be agreed to by the two debaters alone. When I suggest this, people often say it would result in chaos, but I doubt it. Putting people on their honor often works better than depositing them in a legalistic framework where outsiders have to enforce the rules since that tends to relieve the participants of any responsibility for their own behavior. In Europe, there are towns that have eliminated traffic control signs altogether, and they are often safer than similar burgs in the US full of Stop signs and Slow signs and Prepare to Stop signs and Stop Sign Ahead signs.


                                                                        *


I saw it again today (12-9-12) in the NY Giants – New Orleans Saints game. The Saints were trailing 35-20 late in the 3^rd quarter, scored a touchdown to make the score 35-26, and then kicked an extra point to pull within 8 points. This is a fundamental strategic mistake, and every coach in the NFL makes it. It has been at least ten years since I have seen a coach, down 15 late in a game, score a touchdown and go for a 2-point conversion, though it is the only rational play.


When asked about this (and these days they are never asked), a coach will say he wanted to position his team “within one score,” by which he means 8 points. The problem is that 8 points is not “one score.” Seven points is “one score” because one can assume the extra point after a touchdown, but no one can assume a 2-point conversion. In the NFL, a 2-point conversion is a 50-50 proposition. It's a coin flip.


The point is this: 15 points is not two scores; it is two scores plus a coin flip. It might be three scores---you just won't know until you try your 2-point conversion. Similarly, 8 points is not one score; it is one score plus a coin flip. It might be two scores. And if you, as a coach, need a coin flip to catch up and force overtime, don't you want to flip that coin as soon as possible?


 In the context of the NY – NO game, when the score is 35 – 26 and you are deciding whether to kick for one or run a play for two, WHY WOULD YOU DELAY FINDING OUT WHETHER YOU NEED TWO MORE SCORES, OR ONLY ONE? Why don't you want to know now? And if you want to know now, what possible reason could there be to kick a single extra point just for the pleasure of being down eight points?


                                                                 *


Believing as I do in the burning bush and the resurrection, I'm reluctant to mock other people's theology as goofy or illogical, but I do find certain faiths difficult to take seriously.


Beliefs and rituals and festivals about food are so human, so hard-wired into all of us, that a religion without them makes me suspicious. Catholics have the Last Supper, the Seven Fishes, the meatless fast days. Jews have their Seder and their bitter herbs and their Jewfood obsessions (e.g., brisket). Muslims butcher meat in prescribed ways, and long for the sundown meal during Ramadan.


Now consider the Quakers. They've been in America for 350 years, centered in Philadelphia, which is a food town if there ever was one, but have somehow managed NOT to put their stamp on any distinctive cuisine. Is there a Quaker-style fried chicken? Is there a catfish-a-la-Betsy-Ross? What is “Quaker food,” anyway? Oatmeal?


Then there's the Mormons, who are only marginally more chow-conscious than Quakers. Utah consumes more Jello per capita than any other place on earth, for example. Perhaps the height of Mormon gastronomy is something called “funeral potatoes,” (a fun-loving name for a dish if ever there was one). These consist of frozen,shredded potatoes, canned cream of chicken soup, sour cream and crumbled cornflakes, all baked at approximately 1650 degrees Fahrenheit for three hours and twenty minutes (or until done).


My son shares an apartment in Salt Lake City with two young Mormon gentlemen. Stacked in several spots around the abode are a number of 25-lb boxes of “RICE” and “OATS” and other no-frill staples. The LDS church recommends this, you see. Everyone is supposed to have a least six months of provisions against the inevitable societal meltdown or Rapture or apocalypse. That reflects the fundamental attitude of Mormons toward food. It's all about survival. Mormons are allowed to have fun, but not by eating.


Copyright2013MichaelKubacki