South Africa is a country with a great deal of promise, and a great deal of trouble. It was a fairly open secret that I am seriously considering working in the country. Now, that secret is public. If my UChicago PhD had been successful, The University of Cape Town was my first choice for a job application. Before talking more about why I would consider that country, I’m going to blog an event from South Africa, city of Rustenburg – the Association football game between England and the US.
- Pregame: I’m glad ABC is carrying the anthems, one of the nice parts of international competition. For my international viewers, it’s typical for Americans not to sing the anthem, unlike many other nations.
- 3:30: Gerrard scores easily for England. Reviewing the tape, I’m not sure who was asleep there. I think it was US #13 Clark, because #3 Bocanegra had been covering the corner. The English commentator is very restrained, but I’m sure all of London and Manchester are relieved.
- 13:00: The short corner is vastly underused in my mind. Given what non-Americans say about association football, that possession is very important, why do teams execute low probability attacks in corner kicks from a good position? Since the defense must stay 10 yards away, one could get 5 – 7 yards closer and improve the angle. US #6 Cherundolo is amazed he’s that open.
- 19:00: After good service from Donovan on one end, England #7 Lennon gets open but for some reason doesn’t take a decent shot. Shooting is another underutilized tactic. The goal is huge! I believe it’s because players don’t practice it enough; casual street games generally utilize small goals and emphasis is placed on footwork. It’s the opposite of basketball, where casual contests are often all shooting.
- 26:00: England #16 Milner is playing terribly; another late tackle results in a yellow card. Should he be substituted?
- 29:00: US Goalkeeper Howard gets accidentally struck on a fair challenge. US #3 Bocanegra was too far inside, again. During the injury break, Milner is substituted. Drats.
- 37:30: Late in the half, England has tried to slow the pace, kicking the ball around midfield. I’m not surprised by this. Donovan gets a hold of the ball and has a decent shot.
- 39:30: Wow. Just, wow. “The man in the green jersey, the man with Green on the name of his shirt, has given away one of the softest goals you’ll ever see at this level of football.” From 27 yards, US 1 England 1. I play better goalie than that. To illustrate America’s biggest advantage, Howard then makes an excellent save on the post-goal counterattack. All of England sinks back into its rain-induced moroseness.
- Halftime: the score is about right, though not in the way most people expected. The game is very, I must say, American – lots of long balls and higher risk play. Possession is roughly equal, as are corner kicks. England has had more good chances, due to superior offensive play – and Bocanegra’s random play. England already took out its weakest defender, who Cherundolo was beating easily.
- 50:00: That offsides looks correct to me. While England #10 Rooney, the eventual ball taker, was not offside, the other player caused the defender to have to play him, not the ball.
- 51:00: England #21 Heskey breaks free. That’s a mediocre shot in the center, but Howard still has to work for the save, keeping the US alive. If the goalies today were switched, it’d be 3-0 England.
- 57:00: That was a horrible deep throw in for the US, with only one real option. The best possible outcome was a corner kick; instead the ball goes back to midfield.
- 59:00: England #18 Carragher gets a yellow card for taking out legs and stopping an attack. It was dangerous, reckless, and smart. He was beaten.
- 60:00: England #4 Gerrard makes a high, spikes-up tackle. I’m not sure that was dangerous enough for a yellow card, but it was dangerous play. This is a good location for a free kick. Bocanegra’s about 45 degrees off on the header.
- 63:00: US #13 Clark appears to miss another marking assignment. Please substitute him, Coach Bradley.
- 64:00: US #17 Altidore just runs by Carragher, who’s old and slow. Mr. Green makes a solid save, just barely; it hits the post.
- 70:00: Compared to the other games I’ve watched, South Africa-Mexico and France-Uruguay, there’s a lot more space in defense on both sides here. It’s a lot faster. England is leaving only 3 defenders back. Unfortunately, US #10 Donovan has had to come back on defense.
- 75:00: Another wonderful save for Howard. The US could use a defensive substitution at this point for fresh legs. Maybe for Clark, or Spector? No, they went for a fresh attacker. That makes sense for counterattacks, but a defender would also help. England’s last sub is Crouch, a fresh attacker.
- 81:30: England tries to play the ball across the back and fails. I’m not sure why, since it’s dominated this half.
- 85:00: A sub for Altidore? Not Clark? Oh. Moving Dempsey forward puts fresh legs in midfield.
- 90:00: Good US offense gets a late corner. Donovan takes his time, but nothing happens, like most corners.
- 94:00: Smartly, the US tries a very late substitution to kill time. It wasn’t needed, though, as the game ends. To misquote Dickens and quote the announcer, “It was a Tale of Two Goalkeepers.”
As for a longer stay in South Africa, I’d first go because of the weather and climate. Have a look at Cape Town’s sunshine chart. The lowest month, June, still has about 6 hours per day. Cape Town is between San Francisco and Los Angeles in sun hours, more than acceptable. Most of the rest of the country is just as good, or better.
For comparison, try
Chicago’s chart with bad winter months under 6 hours of sun per day. To be really scared, try London. No wonder the Brits are perpetually morose, or that they built an empire of sunny places.
Beyond that, South Africa has opportunity. It’s not just temporary economic opportunity, from the big tournament down there. I mean the chance to do big things, transformative things, particularly in education. The South African educational system is broken, like the US one. The Springbok system is much worse overall. The difference, and the appeal, is that the system down there can be fixed. People care, whereas here athletics departments have far too much power. (South Africa also enjoys sport, but it’s not so heavily intertwined with education.) Also, South Africa has centralized standards, which means a good idea can be propagated. In parts of this country, we have elections for standards, experience or thought not necessary. Even where we don’t, we have too much local control to get one set of ideas. Maybe I’ll go more into this later; in summary, the current American system cannot fix its problems without a major overhaul. Neither can South Africa, but my subjective evaluation is that it’s more possible to do down there.
Now that it’s a few days later, let’s see how the US fares against Slovenia. It’s nice that I don’t have class on Friday mornings.
- 0:10: In Ultimate Frisbee, that ball would be called a hospital pass. US #8 Dempsey gets above the Slovenian player, and puts an elbow into the Slovenian player. The referee calls a foul, but no card. Looking at the replay, there doesn’t appear to be malice; the arm was next to the body. Maybe it’s a yellow, but without extension I don’t see an ejection.
- 8:00: The US makes a throw-in error, leading to a decent chance for Slovenia. Or, as some might call them, the Charlie Browns.
- 11:30: The US spends 30 seconds kicking it around the back in midfield, then for some reason decides to send it to the opposite far line with nobody there. It looks like France.
- 12:30: Great GOAL for Slovenia #10 Birsa. Though the shot was great, it again came from horrible American defense. The Slovenian player was completely open at the top of the penalty half circle. The US should be better at defensive organization. North Korea looked better.
- 15:00: Decent service by US #10 Donovan to the penalty area; a US player had a chance at a header for a goal but couldn’t get there.
- 22:30: Has anyone explained why goal kicks are always so long and random? It is like punting. Has anyone tracked the proportion of goal kicks that are recovered? At best, it seems to go back to the defenders at midfield. Why don’t teams kick the ball to their defenders and walk it up? Teams don’t play tight defense often.
- 26:15: The camera manages to find the archetypal American: very portly, hairy, shirtless, and holding a relatively cheap beer. I cringe.
- 30:30: US #5 Onyewu doesn’t really pull down someone, but it’s dangerous and a bad referee could have called a foul. This game is not as good for the defender as the last.
- 35:40: Slovenia #5 Cesar picks up a yellow card on a marginal drawn foul. US #16 Torres makes a good shot, and the keeper does well to block it.
- 38:30: US #20 Findley doesn’t take a shot when he has the chance, getting a corner. On the corner kick, it’s a strange yellow card for handball. The US immediately gets another good chance and another corner, but no shots. I wonder if this is conditioning? Donovan should have made a slide tackle, instead of staying up. All he needed was to deflect the ball to the goal.
- 41:00: Slovenia #9 Ljubijankic gets another goal, with a great finish. He was not offside – Onyewu was too far back. Goal difference matters now. 2-1 is much better than 2-0.
- 47:15: Donovan has been watching hockey. A Slovenian defender misses a sliding clearance, setting him free. He has a very tight angle. He roofs it! The goalie expected a low shot to the far post. The US has some momentum.
- 51:00: Slovenia gets a good free kick, and does well, getting a corner off a goalie punch. Slovenia has already started to slow down. Slovenia tries a short corner, but the US has it defended. I’m pleased.
- 59:00: It’s wrestling in the penalty box. Both people fouled, and Slovenia got the call.
- 68:00: On a US counterattack, Slovenia #4 Suler clubs a US player from behind. I agree with the commentator, that yellow is correct. Red cards are awarded only for clear chances, and the ball was rolling away here. Suler was smart by hitting the US player just before the penalty box. The free kick leads to chaos, and a shot, with a good goalie save.
- 71:00: Slovenia is starting to play Euro defense, picking up yellows. They’ve played pretty until this point, but it might change. The Americans will have the conditioning advantage. At 74:30, there’s another, though I’m not sure about that one.
- 79:30: This game has opened up as players tire, on both ends. I’m about eight minutes behind on TiVo, resisting the temptation to jump forward. The US substitutes attack for defense.
- 81:10: It’s a dogpile! US #4 Bradley! Gorgeous soccer! 2-2! The father even jumps up. I wonder why the US coaches have giant parkas. It’s not that cold in South Africa. The Slovenian coats are nicer.
- 84:30: US #17 Altidore is beating defenders, getting a foul near the corner of the penalty box. It’s into the back of the net, but the goal is disallowed. I’m not sure who fouled. The US commentator thinks it’s horrible. I can’t see inside, so I really don’t know. On the replay, I see 3 US players getting held. Seriously, two of them are encircled at the waist! “I see Michael Bradley being fouled, and that’s a penalty kick.”
- 87:30: Nice header by Slovenia, which is saved.
- 92:30: Even though two players go down, that’s not a foul. Dempsey stepped on the ball, which led to a pile.
- 94:00: That’s the match, which ended with a double final whistle. Slovenia 2, US 2. Slovenia was better in the first half, the US much better in the second. It was not a good game for the referee.
At noon, Slovenia has 4 (with +1 goal differential), US 2 (0), England 1 (0), and Algeria 0 (-1). In the afternoon game, the US should root for Algeria. An Algerian win means the US controls its destiny; a victory advances them. An Algerian draw does as well. The best possible outcome is a 0-0 draw, since then the US would likely advance if the remaining two games draw as well. If England wins, it’s not a given. A US victory by two goals would then be sufficient, but not necessarily by one.
I’ve now hit 2000 words, and I haven’t even done the review of rugby. That will have to wait for another post, I guess. There are plenty more games on.
Since I’m not working on a dissertation this summer, I’m reading books again. The first of several reviews is on SuperFreakonomics, the sequel to the widely popular book by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner.
Sure, the first book had that little problem with the abortion model being wrong. Total count versus per capita? Ignoring the crack cocaine epidemic? Tortured state-level dummy models running toward saturation? Who cares if the recent outside analysis found little real evidence supporting the hypothesis? Earlier, it made Dr. Levitt popular. In 2005, it sold books. And he has a doctorate and a tenured position, while, I, well, don’t. Thus, this review is not going to be a statistical critique. Besides, that might also turn off my 3 daily readers.
Instead, let me comment on the topics and level of analysis. This book moves more towards economics, and away from statistics. I wonder if this was because the authors feel more comfortable in the land of strange terms than the messy world of Mathematics after the Fall. One chapter covers prostitution, with some interesting facts in between italicized economic terms. I was not surprised by the reduction in prostitution, that now only about 5% of men lose their virginity to a prostitute. The cost of sexuality has decreased, particularly for females, and they engage in it more freely. (Wow, it’s a double entendre! I saw a promo for an Adam Sandler movie.) Actually, I had heard about Ms. Allie before, as Dr. Levitt had given a speech at the 2006 MSMESB Conference. He was the lunch speaker, not an academic talk.
There are other nice tidbits, like the back-of-the-envelope calculation on the shoe bomber. Haven’t the terrorists won? All the time involved with belts, shoe removal, semi-pornographic viewing, and redressing takes up person-years, effectively stripping away lives. Every September 11 Security Fee is a victory for the terrorists. It’s a good way to look at things, sometimes.
In the end, sometimes becomes always and a problem. I see the authors almost frantic to defend Homo Economicus, the world of rationality where Kapitalism lives. Thus, they spend page upon page trying to destroy altruism and feeling. Yes, monkeys can be trained to use money, and engage in a very limited market economy. Yes, the Dictator Game has flaws. A simple lab experiment doesn’t cover real life exactly. Yes, one can design lab experiments where people don’t give away as much. They’re lab experiments. They have little ecological real-world validity. My Math 200 students should know that.
This is a nice book, though closer to an economics textbook. I’d recommend the first book (a 3 out of 5, above average) over this tome, which receives a 2. This time, I was reminded too many times of the oratory of Robert Kennedy. No, not the Indianapolis King speech, since there are few riots in America anymore. I recall this speech given at the University of Kansas on March 18, 1968.
This blog is going to post on topics related to money for a while, perhaps a relief after all the Armageddons reviewed the past year. Kennedy spoke about GNP, but maybe it’s about all of economics.
It measures everything, in short, except that which makes life worthwhile.
As some of you know, I attempted to complete my PhD in Statistics from the University of Chicago this year. Monday and Tuesday, I presented on my first 2 chapters and asked for a few months to finish the rest. This was unsuccessful, as the faculty thought I could not complete things in the remaining time. I received a MS, Master of Science, and was separated from the program.
Sadly, television footage of the event was nonexistent, as the Discovery channel did not choose to attend. Like all big events, we can imagine a sideline reporter, who peppered me with questions after the decision. This fantasy reporter will ask thoughful things, though. This will serve as a FAQ – Failure Asked Questions.
What did you think of your performance Monday afternoon?
Well, Hedy, I carried through, but it wasn’t my best day. There were two typos in the slide deck, which is very embarrassing by my standards. The audience was challenging, too, with six professors in the audience all free to ask questions.
We heard rumors that you had trouble with some of the questions because of an ear injury?
Yes, my right ear was clogged, and I couldn’t hear from that side. It’s no excuse, though, in the playoffs. After all, hockey players take out their own teeth. This was nothing.
Before this, you thought you could get through. [Flashback to interview with Rosalind]
I always knew it would be tough out here, but I had put in a lot of effort this year and thought I had a chance.
What changed?
A few things. Maybe most importantly, none of the members of my original committee were available, so nobody there was very familiar with my work.
There are very few good stories when the entire committee has been lost.
Sure. Losing everyone is no Fairytale, though I might be cursed. They set a different standard than what I had been working towards. It might not be enough to finish code, simulations, and some basic applications. Maybe I should also need to show superiority over a variety of models, or one big model. I should have asked for clarification 6 months ago, or even 3 years ago.
What about your motivation? There seems to have been dissention at times.
It’s not a secret that I haven’t always been enthusiastic about my thesis. I’m not, and have never been, a theoretical statistician. I like model building and teaching. It’s been a struggle. This year, though, I set aside other things and really attacked the problem. Most of you have seen and heard a lot less from me this year. It wasn’t enough. While I disagree with the opinion that I would need a year more, I needed full time support and effort. I just didn’t have it.
What comes next?
Well, I have a one-year contract with my current employer. Then I’ve got options. As much as I’d like to just take a community college job with an MS, those jobs are disappearing, thanks to accreditation and rankings. I can go to industry and become wealthy, or I can find a place to complete a terminal degree. For instance, Quantitative Research Methods at the Michigan school of education would fit me well, as would Minnesota’s statistics education program. The problem is that both of them are in cold, dark climates. That got me into trouble at Chicago. I’ve got time to make that decision.
And how do you feel?
Yes, I’m tired, disappointed, and hurt, but not Johnny Cash hurt. While I wish we would have ended things 3 years ago, if this was going to be the standard, I gained a lot of experience in this time. I now have ideas for a career, not just a PhD and promise. Most importantly, I am so much healthier, overall, that I’d jump again. But if I’m going to come back for another season, it’ll have to be the right fit, both in work and location.
Thanks for your time.
You’re welcome.
In Chicago, before my talk on the first 2 chapters of my dissertation, I was going to spend Saturday afternoon wandering the maze at the Morton Arboretum in Lisle, between stays for the Hyatt and American Airlines promotion. It’s amazing how things get when two companies – in this case American Airlines and Marriott – break a relationship. Suddenly the other hotels all have extra-good AA promos. (If you live in Chicago, about $300 can turn itself into 28,000 AA miles and 3 Hyatt nights, enough for a flight in the US and 3 nights there. It’s a great deal.)
However, it was chilly in Chicago today, less than 10C (50F), and I didn’t want to walk outside. So, with time between check-out and check-in, I went to Borders and grabbed a few books with interesting titles. One of those was The Last Christian by David Gregory. (Don’t be fooled; the publisher Waterbrook Multnomah is not Christian; it’s part of Random House.) When I saw it on the new books display, I wasn’t even sure if it was fiction or non-fiction. As it was futuristic science fiction, I started reading. Two hours later, I had spent my afternoon and now have a quick review.
Mr. Gregory has an interesting premise. He advances society to 2088, and makes two major changes. The first change is that technology has advanced to the point where brains can be replicated in computer form. While this technology has just begun, almost all Westerners have neural implants and access virtual reality. Most communication takes place in lifelike VR, though people still move face to face. (Interestingly, though, physical transport is not at higher speed, just more automated.)
The second change is that Christianity, and all other religions, have effectively disappeared from the US and Europe. It’s basically a hyper-acceleration of the decline argument in evangelical and Catholic circles. Our protagonist, Abby, is exempt because she is the daughter of a missionary family, who lived with the natives in Papua New Guinea and had no working Internet Link. In a Deus ex machina, contact with these natives had been prohibited by law, to protect their culture, and nobody had checked on her for at least 20 years, including the organization that arguably supported her parents’ work.
This points out both the strength and weakness of Mr. Gregory’s work. The fact that I finished the book in one sitting should indicate that I liked it, at least somewhat. After all, Borders had plenty of other options. The plot moves briskly; I was actually surprised by two minor twists, though the main climax is foreseeable by about page 90. Additionally, several of the characters are complicated; there’s a feeling that they have backstory, and this affects the novel in a couple places. Those are good things. Also, there are questions of faith throughout the novel, some mentioned in the Reader’s Guide. (The Guide contains spoilers, so be careful.)
At the same time, there are several problems with the text, which lead me to my rating of just an average 2 out of 5. Some are theological; even with the current troubles in Catholicism, I find it crazy to believe that Catholicism could be eliminated within three generations. Many people baptized today would be alive in 2088. With the mentioned improvements in medicine, priests ordained today would still be alive. They just wouldn’t go away, Tolerance Act or no.
Additionally, the characters are too interconnected. Yes, it makes it easier if there are fathers, and grandfathers, and the like. But that makes this too simple, too coincidental. It’s another machina, not including the ones created in the book. At least, the professor could have been mere professional interest. And did the nearest relative HAVE to be a Senator? It’s overly tidy and simplistic, which is interesting given that the characters are also complicated.
Overall, I don’t want to be too harsh, as the main question is interesting. Would you take indefinite, potentially eternal life on Earth? Or hope for Heaven? Mr. Gregory’s fundamentalist arguments are a start, just a beginning. Though I appreciate that, there’s space in the science fiction realm that I hope more nuanced authors could consider.
I experienced one of the problems with American health care tonight: 94 eye care providers. While this may seem like a marvelous example of Kapitalism at work, I am worse off than if I had fewer options. Let’s delve into this.
It’s not that my eyesight has degraded, I think, but my last eye exam was 2 years ago. I have no spare contacts, and my glasses are scratched, so it’s time for a new exam, glasses, and contacts. My insurance year ends May 31, so that plays a role, too. Unhappy with my last eye doctor in Louisville, who took 6 weeks to schedule me and didn’t handle my insurance paperwork, I decided to search on my provider’s website. I entered my zip code, selected a 20 mile radius, and got over 200 possibilities. Well, Louisville is a fairly big city, and that’s basically the entire city, so that’s too much. Reducing the distance, within 5 miles of my zip code there remain 94 providers!
My insurance provides a PDF listing. On this list, I can see each provider’s name, gender, degree (OD, OPT, MD), associated company, address, and phone number. The symbol listings at the bottom have entries for “accepting new patients” and “not accepting new patients”, but none of the entries have either mark. A couple people list a second language, which would be useful if I would be more comfortable in French, Spanish, or Hebrew. That’s the best part, but I want English so it doesn’t decide things.
Overall, there is almost nothing here. There’s not even a description of the degrees. Which do I need? I have to head off to eHow to get a description. OPTs don’t do exams. ODs do general exams. MDs can handle more difficult cases and surgery. An OD should be fine for me. (This OD isn’t the OD Latin for Right Eye, by the way. Fortunately, in an example of good sense, OD and OS are supposed to be replaced with Right and Left. No more sinister Lefties!)
Another factor, I guess, is that I’m not looking at 94 providers, but rather a smaller number of centers. Most doctors, though not all, are associated with a clinic structure, like Kentucky Eye Care PSC, Vision First, or Dr. Bizers Vision World. I count 14 centers within 5 miles. This would help me somewhat, except there’s no general information about the centers. Google search sends me to healthgrades.com, which only has 77 listings for the entire city. That’s not much help. There are also ratemds.com and vitals.com, each with a few reviews. Most people, and even most groups, have none. I have no filter.
There’s not even a list of specialities, or areas, or programs. As a comparison, when searching for colleges there are a lot of providers organized into groups, like me. It can be overwhelming, and the USA might be better off with fewer larger schools. Yet there are listings, guides, and data. No such information exists for eye doctors. Continuing the analogy, one can make college visits and see sample classes. I don’t think there are sample eye exams.
Putting it all together, I have no idea who to select. I would do much better if Bellarmine’s human resources department had handed me 3 preferred choices, with commentary they had prepared. I might even do better if the plan had ONE choice that they, as more knowledgeable people, had chosen to be best. From their perspective, the transaction costs in dealing with 1 or 3 providers would be less than the dozens around Louisville. In the quest for “freedom”, we all have to pay greater transaction costs. And I, like other consumers, are asked to make choices without information or background.
I just don’t know. I’m in analysis paralysis, the the The Paradox of Choice. More is less, because I must spend much more time on the decision, plus I have a much greater likelihood of suboptimality, and thus am more likely to be unhappy. Author Barry Schwartz explained the problem in a TED talk. Mr. Schwartz mentions health care in his talk. As he notes, it’s not patient autonomy, it’s a shift of responsibility from an expert to a less able decision-maker.
There’s another good solution beyond my choice reduction, of course. In the comments on the talk, a Chris Grayson makes a good point: “Our problem is not too much choice but too poor filters. As choice multiplies, informed recommendation becomes increasingly valuable.” But until that happens for eye doctors, or Bellarmine frees us from the false benefits of Kapitalistic “freedom”, I still have to stare at those 94 choices with my old glasses, and not be totally blinded by choice.
I went to the NCAA basketball championship in Indianapolis last night. My trip home from Chicago to Louisville literally passes within sight of the stadium, so it was an easy diversion. After Butler won Saturday night, Stubhub provided a seat. I have pictures and commentary from the game, and TiVo to review what actually occurred versus what I thought I saw from the nosebleed seats. I’m a little hurt from the 61-59 defeat, so it will take me a few days.
As I drove home, though, I wasn’t that dismayed, because there’s a lot of joy in my heart. I almost saw a fairytale. Earlier, one of the radio tunes approaching Indianapolis was from Omar Samhan’s crush Taylor Swift, Today was a Fairytale. Could Monday night become one?
The student-athletes of Butler played hard and played well. Butler’s motto is The Butler Way: The Butler Way demands commitment, denies selfishness, accepts reality, yet seeks improvement everyday while putting the team above self.
You could do much, much worse. They represented young men valiently, from going to class on Friday, to church on Sunday, to dealing with poor officiating on Monday. With 5 minutes left, their best player got shoved into the basket support on a breakaway, a play so dangerous that doing that in a pickup game would typically lead to a fight. As the officials gathered, those of us in the stands knew. “It’s D–e. That’s not going to be a flagrant foul.” Of course. Despite many things, Butler held close. Close enough for belief.
When I used online dating, I started my profile with “A friend once said that in my world, fairy tales still exist.” Why not? We read those stories to children because they have the values we want them to learn. Yes, we fail in them. Yes, I fail in them. That doesn’t make them wrong principles.
Watching Butler fight tonight, the crowd believed, even the worried D–e supporters. We tried to help, cheering Butler and being noisy when the opponent had the ball. Things looked bleak after the knockdown thuggery, but Butler recovered. Then, after a scrappy rebound with 33 seconds to go, Butler had a chance. During the timeouts with 13 seconds left, the crowd believed in fairy tales. And as the last shot went into the air, even from halfcourt, for a few seconds there was a rare, special hope.
Coach Stevens spoke very well in the ESPN interview outside the locker room. (For contrast, listen to the Michigan State coach’s comments from Saturday night.) The players were hurt, not disappointed. Several of them later answered questions. The effort, the journey, still meant a great deal. On the way out, the fans understood that as well. I saw sadness, but no sense of failure. It was always an uphill battle, monetary and otherwise, for anyone outside the BCS Circle. While 50,000 people inside the stadium, millions of people watching on TV, and I wanted the fairy tale, I can still be satisfied with what I received. As Coach Stevens said, “This one, obviously, got a lot of people dreaming.” Eventually, it will happen. Until then, thank you, Butler Bulldogs, for pleasant dreams.
I’m in my second home, a Hyatt, with a 14th floor view of Interstate 88. Tonight it’s the Hyatt Lisle out in the Chicago suburbs. Right now, God is dead, though according to my favorite news channel Russia Today, the Holy Fire has traveled from Jerusalem to the Orthodox Cathedral of Christ the Savior.
Tonight, in the way that the grand Orthodox Cathedral represents part of Russia, there’s a basketball game that represents part of America. One of the teams, Butler University, normally plays at Indiana’s Basketball Cathedral. They are student-athletes, with all the contradictions that entails. The star Butler player went to Game Theory class yesterday. On one side, we have the home team even though they are 259 miles away, the athletes of Michigan State. Nobody talked about their classes.
I don’t have a TiVo, so these comments will be with less review, particularly on fouls. If you’re reviewing this later, the NCAA rulebook is available so you can see what I reference.
16:28: The first call is against Butler, when the Michigan State player pushes into him and falls down. I didn’t have the TV on when the referees appeared. I hope the music wasn’t No Chance in Hell.
12:41: The players at Sports Bubble Stadium have to sit below the floor, which means they can’t study the play as well. To understand this, you need to remember the NCAA motto. Who cares about proper benches when there’s money to be made?
10:15: Butler is not Cornell; they have five non-white players in the game right now. The whole Hoosiers thing is overdone.
9:45: Michigan State makes a three point shot, and the TV has the sound of cheers. Either CBS put microphones in the Michigan State section, or that’s not good news for Butler. Given that I can also hear cheerleader calls, I’ll go with the microphones.
8:47: With less than 5 seconds on the shot clock, the MSU player wildly drives into the Butler defender and gets a call. Right now, Michigan State understands officiating better than Butler.
4:50: Butler is rushing three point shots a little bit, here at 22-20. Their feet are not fully set. There haven’t been any points in 3 or 4 minutes. Michigan State ends the drought with a very nice interior pass for a layup.
3:32: An uncalled foot shuffle travel by Michigan State, countered by a push away from the ball. The Butler push was a foul. I point out all these traveling calls because the officials seem to consistently miss them.
Hitting the one-and-one free throws, fouls 7, 8, and 9 each half, is very important. There are lots of zeroes on them. Michigan State gets two here.
2:48: Great back door cut by Michigan State. Butler’s coach is justifiably annoyed. He calls a timeout. Thanks to an explicit exception for media timeouts, what should be 30 seconds becomes 150. There are plenty of commercials. Who cares about game flow when there’s money to be made?
2:00: Has the foot shuffle travel disappeared from the rulebook? There were two more on this Michigan State possession. No, it’s still there in Rule 4, Section 70. There’s another one later, all by the same player.
2.5 seconds: Butler uses a timeout at 28-28 for a last shot attempt. One of the Butler players, now #20, has done it before. He doesn’t catch it, though.
Halftime: The score is tied at 28. Each team has had 31 possessions, by my count, so the points-per-possession is 0.90. That’s not very good, though it’s a lot better than minutes 21-35 of Kentucky-Cornell. There’s been some good defense: Michigan State has 3 clean blocks, and Butler has made several clean steals. But there’s also been mediocre shooting. That’s part of the Sports Bubble, I suspect. Placing a court in a gridiron stadium makes terrible shooting backgrounds.
Michigan State is getting baskets from their three best players, with 8, 7, and 7 points. Butler is being carried by its two stars who played for the USA Under-19 Team last summer. Remember that the talent level is close to even here. No other Bulldog has a field goal.
Now is a good time to talk about how this represents America. The fundamental American contradiction involves Horatio Alger and General Electric. (By the way, I want a basketball with the Presidental Seal, though I doubt I will adopt the President’s shirt and tie workout wear.) The Horatio Alger Myth is that by leading a valient life, a protagonist gains wealth and honor. It’s rags to riches. Interestingly, Alger’s characters rarely became superbly wealthy, generally just acquiring the earlier version of Levittown, the suburban dream.
The Alger myth is part of America, that through hard work and luck, anyone can advance. This is Cornell, or Butler. It’s to our nature that we routinely help this type of person, we cheer for them, we like this type of victory.
At the same time, America is also home to the Carnegie Steels, General Electrics, and Microsofts, who use size, connections, and power to crush opposition. Many of us support them, as well. That’s what’s strange.
18:20: Butler takes a one-point lead on an opportunistic second chance layup. Michigan State makes a good play to regain the lead.
17:16: Shocking me, the officials manage to not believe that a jersey just wound up in an opponent’s hand.
16:41: The temporary rims at a Sports Bubble installation have a hard metallic bounce. It doesn’t help the shooters, as the Michigan State player misses two free throws.
15:24: Wow, Butler runs a Globetrotter weave. In a world of isolation sets, that’s very unusual. Michigan State doesn’t have that play.
14:19: Butler has figured out that the hard drive gets foul calls, even the reckless drive. It’s worth 1 made free throw. Michigan State gets an #omgdunx. Then Butler gets a tough layup, misses it, gets tackled on the rebound with no call. Momentum might have changed, but Michigan State misses the transition jumper.
12:38: Brilliant Butler defensive switching leads to a turnover and a frustration foul. The commentator is correct, that having lost one ballhandler to injury has hurt the Spartans against a good defensive team. Butler is already in the one-and-one. They only score one, though.
12:15: A Butler steal, a dunk, and momentum almost changed. But the Michigan State player made a good post move to recover, though the ESPN play by play incorrectly called it a layup.
11:32: Worry for Butler, as Butler’s #2 player has muscle spasms and is out. Also, the rebounding is starting to get more brutal.
10:09: The key one-and-one by Butler’s big man is missed. So the one-and-one is a disadvantage. This is relatively common in college. The NBA rule of going from nothing to two shots is better.
9:24: The Michigan State player makes a sliding block, the correct call. The final one-and-one gets two free throws. Now, it’s two shots for Butler the rest of the way, so they have the advantage again. Michigan State still has to go through the three one-and-ones, and they are 0 from 4 this half from the foul line. Did you know that in 1953, fouls until the final 3 minutes resulted in a single free throw? Under that rule, I’d foul on every possession.
7:46: Michigan State has found a good matchup in the low post, but the last two possessions have led to a missed off hand layup, and a missed baby hook. A secret I’ve discovered in recent pickup play is not to be overly concerned with post up play. Spinning layups and contested 6 foot hook shots are middle-of-the-road shots. An open 3 point field goal is much better for the opponent. I once found a shot chart that showed this.
Here it is. Note the blue line, shooting percentage. It’s basically flat from 5 feet through 24. Actually, the shooting percentage is maximized around the three point line. That doesn’t mean a three pointer is easier than a 10 foot shot, of course. It’s not. It means that players are much more likely to take closer contested shots. From NBA figures, a contested shot subtracts about 20 points from success percentage – 60% to 40%, for instance.
6:04: The Butler player makes a great move and draws a foul. The Michigan State player wasn’t angry at the call, rather the lack of help defense.
5:00: An absolute thug rebound goes to Michigan State, and Butler misses a left hand half hook. Despite great defense, they’re only up four.
4:25: Butler rushes two put-backs, which would have been a big help. They haven’t had a field goal in 8 minutes.
2:23: Butler makes a steal and an attack. It’s only worth free throws, though, and only one is made. It would have been better to pull up for a eight foot block jumper.
1:34: Finally, Butler makes a field goal, on a missed open 3, great clean rebound and save by a guard, then a pass for a layup.
1:18: Fouls 7 and 8 for Michigan State have been shooting fouls, ruining the advantage of the one-and-one. They’ve been worth two points and a clean offensive rebound. off a metallic long bounce.
56.3 seconds: Foul 9 is a key one-and-one. Michigan State gets the first. The coach puts in their best rebounders, but Butler’s coach does not. It’s made, though. Butler 50-49.
23.0: An eight footer rattles out for Butler. Thanks, temporary supports. Michigan State has the ball with a chance to win. Butler made a mistake here by not shooting quickly, so they could see another possession. We’ll see if it hurts them. Will Michigan State run the clock down? Likely not, as they want multiple options, and they can crash the rebounds with impunity. It’s exciting.
6.5: There’s no foul on the Michigan State attempt, though lots of unofficial commentators believe so in the ESPN chat. The Michigan State player leaned forward to try to make contact. The play starts with about 10.5 seconds in the game, inside the highlight. It starts around 1:08 in. As Rule 4, Section 74, Article 1, part d states, “The defender shall not be penalized for leaving the playing court vertically or having his or her hands and arms extended within the vertical plane.” If anything, it’s closer to an offensive foul for Charging. As Rule 4, Section 10 states, “Charging is illegal personal contact by pushing or moving into an opponent’s torso.” And Rule 10, Section 1, Article 7 reminds us “contact caused by the momentum of the player who has tried for goal is charging.” I’m impressed that the referees made the correct call there.
6.1: A Butler guard gets the rebound and two key free throws. Make! Make! Leaders, like freshmen class presidents, do that.
5.8: The Michigan State coach is yelling, and has to be restrained by HIS PLAYER. He claims the clock started early. It didn’t. That should be a technical foul.
2.0: Butler plays smart! They attempted to foul and almost made a strip. They then got the semi-intentional two shot foul. The first is made to go to 52-50. Now the second is a natural miss, but Butler’s star grabs the rebound, even though a Michigan State player commits a blatant violation of Rule 9, Section 1, Article 2 g by coming inside the three-point line before the ball strikes the backboard. Bulldogs WIN! Horatio Alger cheers!
That was a very quick game; it took less than 90 real time minutes. It wasn’t an offensive clinic. By my physical count, there were 29 possessions in the second half, a total of 60 for the game. (The formula is slightly off.) Michigan State had 0.83 points per possession, and Butler won with 0.87. The overall college average is about 1.01. What happened? I also see 8 missed Michigan State free throws. Butler missed 7, though, so that’s close. Rebounds are close, too. Michigan State had 6 offensive of 26 (23%), while Butler had 10 of 38 (26%). The major factor was turnovers. Butler had 8. Michigan State had 16, 12 of which were Butler steals.
Anyway, since I’m headed through Indianapolis Monday evening, back to work, I dropped a little cash for a nosebleed seat. There’s more to come, and it may not end in a loss.
I’m TiVo blogging an event where two teams are playing for a million dollars. On one side, we have students from Cornell. The Ivy League doesn’t have athletic scholarships, and it has academic restrictions. Also, to minimize the number of missed class days, league travel games are played on Fridays and Saturdays. On the other side, we have athletes from Kentucky. Their team played about half their league games on Saturdays, but also scheduled Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday games for TV. Who cares about academics when there’s money to be made?
Cornell also provides a wider variety of opportunities. You might be surprised to know that Cornell Big Red sponsors 12 NCAA sports for men and 15 for women, while Kentucky Athletics has only 10 for men and 11 for women. There’s a difference in attitude, participation vs cash. Of course, Cornell is pretty much doomed.
In keeping with how the NCAA views its low-paid money spinners – excuse me, “student athletes” (giggle) – I’m not going to use names here. After all, it’s the coaches, generally old white men, that get the benefits. For instance, Kentucky’s coach earns almost $4,000,000 a year. That’s about 100 times what one of his players makes. There’s lots of money to be made. Onto the action.
19:19 1st half: Somehow there’s no foul called, because magically Cornell #20’s jersey fell away from his body into the hand of Kentucky #1. Kentucky #11 then tries to run over a Cornell player, but gets called for a charge.
17:23: The referees miss a travel on Cornell, for which they compensate by not calling the foul on the shot.
12:30: Looking at the court, all five players for Kentucky are black, and all five players for Cornell are white. It’s not 1966 anymore. In that respect, some good things have happened in America.
11:08: Kentucky survived the opening, and the crowd is now quiet. That’s not good for Cornell.
11:04: Cornell outsmarts Kentucky for an inbounds pass dunk. The weird thing here is that an Ivy League team dunked.
8:35: Cornell #1, the 7 footer, is the key person in this game. Without him, Kentucky can use its superior height and size to get lots of inside shots. With him out of the game, Cornell switches to a 1-3-1. Instead of beating it with a double low block post up, Kentucky #24 drives wildly, travelling while doing so (at the start), and a circus shot goes in. The commentator mentions that the Cornell player fell for the shot fake. Well, it will work if the player actually jumps.
7:40: After a timeout, Cornell runs a Princeton offense set. Kentucky immediately commits a foul.
6:51: I really need to check the NCAA rule on travelling, because I think Kentucky #15 shuffled his feet again before scoring a basket. This one is closer than the last two, so it might be OK. Is travelling a point of emphasis on page 20 of the rulebook? No, that’s for women. And it wasn’t a travel, because the dribble started. As the commentator states, the violation was a arm hook foul, Rule 10, Section 1, Art. 4.
5:10: Cornell commits a moving screen, which is properly called. Given the size on the floor, Cornell should move to the Princeton offense, which gave them their only decent look in the last 8 minues. Their only baskets have been on inbounds plays.
3:00: Unlike the play 8 seconds earlier, the strip that leads to a dunk is clean, and Kentucky #11 does not travel. Cornell really needs to spread the court more.
1:45: When I used to play pickup ball, there often was a point where one team would be entirely in the halfcourt, and the other team was just running fast breaks. The defending team had control. Kentucky is that defending team right now. Cornell just doesn’t seem to know how to get spacing.
1:04: If Kentucky could shoot, this game would be completely over. Of course, they can just push the smaller Cornell players around. Basketball has become a lot more physical than when I played, particularly on rebounds. Back when I was young, my parents and I chose basketball because it was supposed to be less of a contact sport. I played in an era where one could not shove into someone else to establish position. I don’t blame the Kentucky players for doing this; they didn’t change the interpretation of Rule 4, Section 55. But it’s interesting what players are not supposed to do on rebounds, according to the rulebook:
Art. 2. To attain or maintain legal rebounding position, a player shall not:
a. Displace, charge or push an opponent.
b. Extend either or both shoulders, hips, knees or extend either or both arms or elbows fully or partially in a position other than vertical so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact with any of these body parts occurs.
c. Bend his/her body in an abnormal position to hold or displace an opponent.
d. Violate the principle of verticality.
Art. 3. Every player shall be entitled to a spot on the playing court, provided that such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.
17:30 2nd half: Cornell finally figures out how to score a basket.
17:10: Amazingly, a travelling foul is called on Kentucky. Maybe a comeback is on the way.
15:41: Right before the break, Cornell #20 missed an open 3 point shot that would have got the crowd going. That was the chance.
14:36: Cornell gets a foul call on a second layup attempt. The first was a foul too (by #54, not #15), but Verticality is another one of those things that doesn’t exist anymore.
14:20: Why is Kentucky #54 taking a three point shot when Cornell’s one big guy is out of the game?
13:20: Kentucky #15 is beginning to get a little frustrated, as Cornell #12 has realized that unlike rebounding fouls, the referees will call blocking fouls. But Cornell misses another open 3. At least Kentucky stupidly tries one as well. Kentucky is 2 of 12 from long distance, and Cornell is 2 of 13. Cornell needed to be 6 or 7 out of 13.
12:41: The proper foul call is not on Cornell #5 here, as the Kentucky player did not jump vertically. The crowd correctly boos.
On the replay, Kentucky #54 makes a strong block. It’s made a lot easier since Kentucky #33 stripped the Cornell player’s hand off the ball first, by making contact below the wrist. It’s a tough call for the official, as I get to run it back in slow motion, while the official is on the other side of the play. From the other side, it would look like hand-to-ball or hand-to-hand contact. Officiating basketball is a difficult task, and it’s safer to not make marginal calls.
10:30: Cornell is 3 of 19 this half. If Kentucky was at all good on offense, this would be laughable.
10:13: Kentucky gets called for a hold. OMG, the millionaire coach with zero non-vacated Final Four appearances is shocked. Can Cornell take advantage with free throws? Yes. Hope remains. In the substitution shot, the official sports drink – Vitamin Water – is clearly visible. Of course, 6 of the flavors contain small amounts of banned substances, but the NCAA clarified that normal amounts were OK, to protect the relationship. Who cares about hypocrisy when there’s money to be made?
9:46: Kentucky #54 makes a great hustle play. By making notes like this, I want to clarify that in no way do I dislike the Kentucky players. By the rules that are enforced, they’re playing well. My issues are with the coaches and rule makers and officials.
9:38: Even the commentators note this uncalled Kentucky travel. Karmically, the shot is missed, and Cornell is desperate. They make a screened elbow jump shot, and the crowd is now attempting to keep Cornell in the game.
8:55: Grabbing a jump shot airball, Kentucky #15 leans backwards at about a 15 degree angle and jumps into Cornell #1. Of course, this is a foul on Cornell. Somehow. I need to figure out how to add a screenshot that shows the angles. The Kentucky coach moves outside the coaching box to applaud. On the free throw miss, having played lots of basketball, I know that it’s very easy to tip the ball if you can get above and push the opponent. There used to be an “over the back” call, 25 years ago when I started playing. You couldn’t consistently do that. Now, there’s not. The game has changed.
6:23: How is Cornell still alive in this game? Kentucky is 2 of 10 on free throws, or something. Oh yes, and Kentucky #24 just made an idiotic foul, and gets sent to the bench. But Cornell misses the second free throw. Are the rims extra small at the Carrier Dome? Neither team can shoot.
5:42: Cornell #12 pulls a Kentucky and forces contact. It works, as the open 3 makes it a 6 point game. Honestly, neither team should advance from this game. I’ve played in better shooting games than this.
5:15: Kentucky #15 shoves Cornell #12 on a rebound, and at the same time Cornell #20 pushes Kentucky #1. The foul is on Cornell, of course.
4:35: Here’s the game in a nutshell. Great Cornell ballfake, uncalled jersey grab, good Kentucky help defense, missed jumper, Kentucky #54 shoves for the rebound, Cornell foul.
3:20: I’m tired of this. Kentucky #54 does the forearm in the back to Cornell #1 on a missed free throw. It’s hideous. Of course he gets position! Heck, I can get position if I’m allowed to do that! It’s not “Height, Strength, and Will” as the commentators say. It’s not legal. It’s as if Rule 10, Section 1, Article 1 does not exist. Under this rule enforcement, Cornell cannot win.
2:46: Kentucky #11 travels on the jump shot attempt, as the ball is not released before the foot touches the ground. It wasn’t “just about come down”; it was down. The player coming in is legal, though. Only one touch in bounds is needed, and the second foot was good.
2:15: Given how poorly Kentucky is shooting, Cornell should be fouling immediately at this point. There are plenty of nerds on the bench. And why are there kid ballboys? They’re about 11 years old, and it’s 11:30 at night. I guess it would cost too much money for the NCAA to employ grownups. They need to keep money for the leaders. Their last leader made over $1,000,000 in one year. Who cares about academics when there’s money to be made?
1:56: With a timeout at 51-41 Kentucky, we switch to the other game in overtime. Interestingly, the foul call on a strip attempt really isn’t one. From Rule 10, Section 1, Article 2, “A player shall not contact an opponent with his or her hand unless such contact is only with the opponent’s hand while it is on the ball and is incidental to an attempt to play the ball.” The player hit the hand while trying to strip the ball. But it looked like illegal contact, and the referees often go on appearance.
In the other game, there was another play that shows basketball today. Lining up for a free throw, there was a lane violation on Kansas State #23, as his back foot was clearly beyond his block. And Xavier #55 committed a violation by having a foot on the block line. Then, both players make contact before the shot. Given the amount of contact there, the foul on #23 is very marginal. He had better position, and both players pushed. I guess the officials called the effect.
1:35: Kentucky #11 did not foul contesting that 3 point shot. Cornell has started to foul aggressively, which is a good idea. But it’s likely too late.
0:00: And it is. 62-45 is a reasonable final given the game. Honestly, Kentucky played miserable offense, but Cornell was worse. Cornell went 5 of 21 from 3, and missed 5 free throws. If you want to beat a superior athletic team, that won’t work.
Finally, listening to the postgame press conference, the phrase Questions for the Student Athletes? led me to start laughing. I know: when was the last time you went to class? If tuition is a student’s “payment”, doesn’t doing well mean that they miss more class, getting paid LESS?
The tournament could use an Ivy League schedule. Or it could schedule the first round on Saturday and Sunday, letting first round losers miss fewer class days. But that would take away from the TV contract. As the transcript suggests, it’s not like classes matter or anything. Or, for that matter, letting the players sleep at a healthy hour, since the mandatory press conference was held around 12:30 AM. Remember the motto, the lesson here: Who cares about academics when there’s money to be made?
By definition, much of what passes in this world is middle-of-the-road; not everything is top of the line. Much of life is working for the center, the average. This includes what I read; books can be, well, average. This post covers a lot of well, decent books – and a movie. They all receive 2 out of 5. That doesn’t mean these pieces lack high points; they do. Yet there are low point, and plenty of middle, too. Let’s head through them.
The Great Awakening
Jim Wallis is considered one of the major players of the religious left, which to some might be a crazy point close to the Apocalypse. It’s small but exists. To quote from his online bio, “Jim Wallis is a bestselling author, public theologian, speaker, preacher, and international commentator on religion, public life, faith, and politics. He is president and CEO of Sojourners, where he is editor-in-chief of Sojourners magazine.” I met Sojourners in college, as a counterpoint to the magazines of the religious right. Then, somehow, Sojourners got big. I’m not sure how, but Mr. Wallis became popular, and he started writing books for a mass audience. I read God’s Politics
a few years ago. There wasn’t anything earthshattering, to someone on top of most of the situation, but it was well written and thoughtful.
This latest book, The Great Awakening, is more of the same. As I got to about Chapter 5, I realized that I wasn’t really the intended audience. I am religious. I am communitarian. Many people would put me on the religious left. I don’t need to read this summary type book, full of cheerleading and quick sermons. It’s not for me. If you are not religious, I would suggest it as a starting point, but just a point. It’s not an apocalypse – it’s gentle and lighthearted. After it, there are better, deeper sources out there, and I hope you would search.
Day by Day Armageddon
Continuing the zombie theme of World War Z, we have Day by Day Armageddon by J. L. Bourne. Mr. Bourne’s biography is a little different from Mr. Wallis. This author, instead of the religious left, belongs to the U. S. Navy, as an active officer. It’s impressive that he found the time to write. It’s a nice story of how decent books can get noticed. The book started from an officer’s free time, went online, got a following and an independent publication, then got picked up. I got mine from a major bookseller.
This is a solid hardcore zombie apocalypse tale. The diary format makes sense, though I’m not entirely sure how one would have that much time. I do like the occasional coffee stain, handwritten note, and so forth. If you like fear, and individual struggle, this is a good book for you.
Where it falls short is in the Deus. No, I don’t mean religious discussion; that’s Mr. Wallis’ area. I mean the happy coincidences that come upon the party, at least two of which are extremely difficult to believe. They do make things easier on the protagonist, and that allows the narrative to change. But it’s too fortunate; the narrator even comments on that, once.
Despite my reservations, I’ll consider the sequel when it drops, likely later this year. It’s a fun read. But it’s not remarkable; it’s not World War Z. Max Brooks developed a world, a backstory, a brilliant literary device, and a massive moral dilemma in the Redeker Plan. It’s easier to write a small, straightforward book like this one, and so I reward the larger work.
The Zombie Survival Guide
I also picked up Mr. Brooks’ other work on zombies, The Zombie Survival Guide, popular enough to find at Walmart.com. It’s, well, not as good. Mr. Brooks tried for a satirical take on survivalist guides. It was alright, but the other book was much better.
District 9
The movie District 9 has a wonderful premise. Having desperate aliens is very interesting. The backstory begs for more treatment. Setting the story in South Africa makes perfect sense, of course, with parallels like Cape Town District 6. Having heard negative comments about Nigerian rackets while in South Africa, I thought that touch was appropriate, though that meant the Nigerian government banned the film.
I had high hopes for this film, like the book Children of Men. Again, I was disappointed. There are lots of good parts, including the lead actor. Sharlto Copley plays Wikus with a mix of human emotions, self-interest, love, sacrifice, and anger. He’s great. I wish he got flawless material. Unfortunately, the writers make mistakes. Some are subtle. For instance, the TV runs an SABC News ticker, with roughly the correct logo. It uses meters for distance. But the telephone number to call was 1-866-666-6001, while toll free numbers in South Africa start with 0800 or 0801. Given that the film was shot in Soweto, South Africa, that’s just strangely sloppy.
Bigger problems come from not understanding violence. This is an adult movie, with killing part of the story. Violence is needed. At the same time, there are several places where bloodiness occurs not to advance the story, but just to make it ickier. Background killing and extra computerized pieces of gore don’t help things. This is a movie made by people with little experience in true violence.
There are also storyline problems. First, in the hospital a military man had a chance to stop Wikus, even though he had a scalpel at a person’s neck. At that distance, a trained miliary marksman easily makes that kill, and the protagonist doesn’t have time to strike. Of course, that ends the movie. There was plenty of tension already; better to have rewritten to avoid that issue. Second, working cellphones can be traced, even when not on a call. Wikus talks to his wife twice, both times for almost a minute. The authorities should bave arrived forthwith after the first call. At least they traced the second call, but why didn’t they come immediately?
In the end, well, the last 20 minutes just get cartoony. One of the things about science fiction is that we must suspend disbelief to some extent. In things like Tolkien, we can. Here, there are just too many gaps. Real South African paramilitaries are a lot more competent. There was no secrecy, given the TV. The government would have blanketed District 9 with troops, and there would have been no escape. It would have been possible to take this wonderful backstory and actor, and make a brilliant movie. Instead, we get average space opera. It’s a shame.
I had my birthday on Thursday, another one, for which I’m thankful. (Thanks for the messages.) If I hadn’t, this piece wouldn’t be written. I’m not yet ready for death. Someone found it strange that one of my common morning prayers is Thank You for the day, even the ones with a futile meeting and two classes and homework to grade. Yes, even the mediocre hand scribbled, copied, piles of homework.
As I woke up for my birthday, people were dying. They always are. Sometimes it’s massive and sudden. For instance, did the people of Port-au-Prince think about an earthquake two weeks ago? Likely not. There is no possible way to bring relief quickly enough. PAP airport has one runway, space for about a dozen planes, and no normal tower. From less than 20 daily planes, it now handles 140.
It doesn’t surprise me that people have complained from afar. It’s the French way. Occupation? Why would the US want to invade Haiti? Seriously? What would we want? I’m also angry with people like this
Huffington Post idiot who somehow imagines that logistics happen. Looking at his biography explains things. He’s worked as a policy analyst, not on the ground!
He has a degree in Economics, where people believe that men are rational and the market is efficient! We’d be better off listening to George Clooney, who has shown how to organize something. And we’d be better off reducing the number of reporters and government leaders. Quit talking and transport water filters and Plumpy’nut!
Haiti is an example of terror and death. Maybe it will improve American preparation. I’m checking my supplies. Today I recharged my powerpack. I have a water filter- do you? – but my stock of prepared liquids are a little low right now, so I’ll add another case of water. Stuff like that.
At the same time as the large events, I don’t want to neglect simpler deathdays. Again, as I awoke Thursday, one of my former students was on the road. Maybe she was in a hurry to get to a 9:25 class. Noel crashed, and as this short Courier-Journal article notes, she died.
I had Noel in the fall for Math 200. Though she and her buddies were not particularly enthusiastic about statistics, she was pleasant in our interactions. And I know she was happy with the grade she earned. I remember her jeans. Apparently, now ripping the knees out of jeans is somewhat fashionable. I never understood why people would want to look sloppy and poor, but some do, like Noel did. I wouldn’t call Noel the most memorable student I had. She wasn’t. She was one of many stories. Now, on this earth, she’s no more.
There will be some memorial at Bellarmine, which I’ll likely attend. As with Haiti, maybe this will spur people to individual action. We’ll appreciate our birthday mornings, and all the other mornings, a little bit more. Maybe my Thank You prayers will be a little longer. Eventually, they’ll run out, just I hope not yet.
