For those of you who remember the
interlude of musical analysis back during Dry January,
Chris Stapleton was the young man doing David Allan Coe's "Tennessee Whiskey." You can be sure he'll take it seriously.
I won't be watching the game tonight, because who could possibly care about Philadelphia versus Kansas City? Even the Eagles fans are mostly looking forward to the riots after rather than the game itself.
9 comments:
Stapleton did a great job. And you missed a really good game - with a really bad call at the end.
Elise
I also didn't like that particular call, but it evened out from the delays that were not called on the Eagles in the first half. We overvalue the importance of events the nearer they are the conclusion, and sports provides us examples of this week after week. We can't help it, apparently.
A serious hockey fan friend of mine taught me that this phenomenon is enshrined in hockey in the idea that during the final period the refs "swallow their whistles." Or as we're more likely to say in football, just let them play.
For me the bottom line is that if the Eagles didn't want their season to be decided by one ref's call, they shouldn't have blown that lead.
Elise
with a really bad call at the end.
The player on whom the call was made disagrees. Corner James Bradberry: It was a holding. I tugged his jersey. I was hoping they would let it slide[.]
And this, a propos your last comment, from Nick Siriani: It always appears to be one call. … That is not what it is. So many teams contribute to the result of the game. Today they were better[.] From https://www.foxnews.com/sports/eagles-james-bradberry-admits-committing-late-debated-penalty-holding
Karch Karai had the same whistle-eating attitude at a volleyball tournament several years ago, as he railed at the refs calling infractions in the late stages of an important game: "Let them play, ref" (I've cleaned up his implorement some). No. The refs were encouraging them to play, by insisting they stay within the rules of the game. The game doesn't change, the rules don't change, just because the game is in its final several moments.
I've had the same attitude as Siriani regarding "winning" shots: who won the basketball game, the player with the buzzer-beater at the end, or his teammate with his team's first basket of the game? What if the buzzer-beater was a two, and the opener was a three?
Eric Hines
Something of a counterpoint that my husband heard on a radio show: There was an earlier play involving the same two players where there was a much more egregious hold but it wasn't called. During the course of a game, players to some extent learn what the refs will and will not allow - like baseball players learning an ump's strike zone. So when Bradberry said "I was hoping they would let it slide" he may have been reflecting this learning.
Elise
@ Elise - I had not heard that. Makes sense. At the largest level it is not even conscious, just an adjustment of muscle memory. People didn't start to palm the basketball or travel all at once, the game changed gradually.
I've always said the refs *don't* decide the game. The players that decide to commit penalties do. Refs should call the game the same all he way through. The call looked bad because everyone was looking in the wrong place, and the replays showed later-in-the-play stuff that clearly wasn't a penalty. The penalty actually happened back at the line of scrimmage.
If there was inconsistency by the refs, that's a valid complaint, but not in terms of changing the results.
I wasn't following the news. What was the score on the riots?
Disappointing this year. I think the cops won.
Post a Comment