I remember reading some Gary Larson commentary on this. He said he realized he had to make the other guys score 0 instead of even some jokey small number because he didn’t want people to get mad he’s implying that the guy could ever even buzz in before God.

“Other than my buddy, right over there on that knoll.”

All the best for his retirement after his legendary career.

He’s somehow made himself the most beloved Dallas sports icon. Aikman’s post-playing success has lessened the feel that he’s ours while making him more of a national figure. Nolan went back to Houston, plus Rangers’ eternal mediocrity puts a ceiling on everyone’s loveability. Emmitt’s kind of cringe worthy. Mike…

I do about 10%. I always had to pay some single digit percent to bar backs and what not when I was a waiter. So if you give 0% ever, your waiter goes negative on helping you. At 10%, it’s low enough that you don’t get mad at coughing up something extra, they’ll never go negative and get something, and I can’t imagine…

Seriously.  Truman Peyote got the highest of honors in this tournament: an audible guffaw.

Man.  I really loved Truman Peyote.  Dumped in the first round.

All rules should start with “Basically” to account for this.

That’s good, but I’d fear a NFL style hell where the definition of catch exceeds comprehension because the writers cannot predict all the types the chaos caused by body parts colliding in sports.

It’s “objectively wrong” because the written version of the rules (applied in the replay) does not line up with the practical application of the rules (applied to live action). That’s the whole point of this discussion. See also Football (definition of catch); Baseball (being momentarily off bag during a slide).

Umps don’t have access to the computerized strike zone because the rules say they don’t have access to it. Which is exactly what “get rid of instant replay means.”

I think this is a part of it.   We want the refs to be protected, and since we are largely all shit and cannot just shrug and accept human error, we backed them into this.

Ever see a strike zone?

It’s a choice, and we’ve chosen to protect refs by making it to where they can rely on technicalities over choosing entertainment and hoping fans say ‘oh well, human error happens.’

You can get philosophical if you want. What if we had 1,000,000x scanning electron cameras? What’s that! Two objects never actually touch! Out on no one! So dumb we confuse the sport with technology. The camera isn’t the game.

This is the basketball equivalent to the baseball microbounce as someone steals a base. Guy goes across the base, tag is applied, and during the slide, slight vibrations raise him a millimeter off the base.   So long as the glove stays on, he’s out.  But he wasn’t out the first 120 years of baseball for that.  It’s…

Why worry about Trout when you have a rotation of Volquez, Smyly, Lynn, Sampson, and Minor at your disposal?

Seriously.  The ball is a physical object in the physical world.  Same with the bat.  And they both typically occupy the same 1.5 square foot space at about the same time.  Even with your eyes closed it seems like you’d get decent contact every now and again.

futilityman

I just left a gay coffee shop, and it was packed with gay people whispering among themselves that . . .