Jump to content


Member Since 19 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 06:58 AM

Topics I've Started

Sport is not sport. It has not been sport for a few decades, imo.

31 March 2018 - 03:55 PM

I'd not really considered making a thread about the ball tampering thing, as, well the issue seemed pretty obvious, but then I just happened upon this article ...




"... Good Friday pumped to work on dogs v Souths game. The game destroyed by penalties. Left the game so disappointed," Johns said on social media on Friday night.

"Rushed home to watch storm v sharks purely as a fan.

Shattered watching the game "It belongs to the fans who pay to watch. Waiting for your response Todd.

"Don't blame the referees I feel for them. Pressure from above. Whoever it is at the top of NRL hang your head. The game belongs not to you or the players. ... "


[ Disclaimer :  I'm not a footy follower. I do recognise the name " Andrew Johns " as a footy 'hero' ]


Johns is cited for the above text from the link.

To my way of thinking, the "game" belongs temporarily to whoever is playing it. The wins. the losses. the injuries. the good / bad media press.

The rules of the " game " come from the designer/s of the game, or the contemporary cultural adjudicators .


Obvious updates to the " game " will always occur with the strength of technology used to record it. With that in mind, it seems logical that rules and regulations would seem to be

stricter today than in times past. And so they must. Humans haven't suddenly become ' holier than thou ', and people like Mr Johns seem to have more thought for the enjoyment

( and money ) from the people who fill the stadium for their pleasure. I have to wonder why sloppy play is considered by Mr Johns to be more important to the game than the players

making the effort to improve their  " game " skill. Would it be more about new players being able to play without having to have a decent skill for the game, meaning the " game " goes

on and keeps the money rolling in for the sponsors and rest of the huge works and jerks that are seen as needed ? To keep the pay checks coming in ? And also, when the players are seriously injured there will always be someone just capable of filling the slot ?


I think Johns seems to think the fans will roll up for the " game " regardless of style and calibre of play. I think ( hope ) he's wrong about that. Sure I know human blood sport is a niche

that has always had it's fans. But these mainstream sporting conglomerates rely on the youth from hard working and also more privileged backgrounds. Where the young teams they grow-up in

are still supposedly about the playing of the game and the team and the community.


Cricket is was very much like that, mostly. It does seem though that the onus on the win and the pay and the future of the individual after the " game" has become more important.

They have families, and properties and a 'name' due to the wins they make. Sponsors build them up. And Sponsors will bring them down if too many losses occur.

Fuck the sponsors. - Just recall how the Sponsors / media crucified Tiger Woods for his private life regardless of his obvious talent.

It doesn't make any sense to me. Cheating is cheating. And when it comes to a team sport where the play is about at least twenty individuals playing together, on the same / opposing sides, then it seems imperative to play by the rules and support your team.


If our sporting nature is allowed to continue it's corrupt downward spiral we have little to no hope of our humane redemption. There might be some who would say if it happens then it would be

standard procedure for our humane -ity.

And there would be absolutely no light in sight for a better calibre of politicians for us either.


 ... my excuse is no commercial tv here, so it might take me a bit longer to be ' over it '

Online or bricks&mortar ...

13 March 2018 - 08:13 PM

I don't shop on-line or bank or pay bills etc. I know I'm becoming more of a minority every day, but that's okay so far.

Places I need to make payments at are still willing to accept my presence and to pay via a debit card. I plan to continue this practice till I can't .

... and then I'll likely have a bit of a useless ( but still satisfying ) rant at them being in the business of making / taking money, but not taking mine over the counter :D


I was in a department store to day looking for something I'd purchased from the same place in the past. It wasn't there, actually hasn't been for a while, but well I live in hope

I'm not the only one looking; it's not a major horror event if I can't get it.

At the counter there happen to be two staff, one a twenty-ish, and the other late thirties early fourties. Feeling a little more communicative than usual I voice my

observations about the lack of the item. Friendly like *grins*, cos I want to hear their thoughts on my future chances - I note the ages to show both are, imo, at quite different

stages in their lives but both have in common, financial commitments ...

The older one says I should look on-line and the youngie pops in to agree. My face must have scowled or something cos they both shut up. Honestly didn't mean to scowl

quite so blatantly, but really I found their suggestion puzzling, and a little cavalier.

I mean they both depended on the profitability of the particular store to get a wage. Why pipe up sooo smartly with the concept of me staying at home and ordering the goods

on-line ? - they have no knowledge of my personal preference, I hope ;)

Any way after the scowl, I just said that I was in their shop to ...shop. Many months ago, the sales person I approached with another quest ( same business ) did the leg work

for me the customer, and I showed up as requested and made my purchase.

Why would you tell a customer to go look on-line for the goods when that customer has come to the shop ?


I'll go back there again, I will just not strike up any convo with those two again ...


edit: removal of a rampant " ' "

Iceland attempts humanity !

21 February 2018 - 07:00 PM

It seems Iceland, or rather a pollie there wants to bring a ban on male circumcision. "Bloody marvellous !" ... I say.

Now the religions are claiming lack of freedom << to be expected. However, the idea is to ban circumcising children until they be old enough to say for

themselves whether they want to be cut ... and then of course the next thing is what age that will be.

Still imo, Iceland you rock !

What do you want ?

29 December 2017 - 08:20 PM

Yep it's about the change of the year. Of course it is .

So what do you want ?

Me ? I want a million bucks and a new head, but that's not likely. At this stage I'll be happy to survive without disease or debt, and my partner along side me for yet another year.

I think I'm passed the age of universal happiness and will settle for not shitting off those that live within my sphere of influence :)

It's the season for jollies, and mania and Christmas ( if that floats your boat ) too.

22 December 2017 - 07:03 PM

Tonight begins my four days of jolly mania. We are not big on the whole family thing, in fact it will be just us two doing as little as possible.

There will be food and scotch and, a stolley, which will be the only 'festive' thing about.

It's warm and muggy and the pool is about fifty feet away. I think that about covers the next four days for me.

How 'bout you ? Doing anything, or nothing like us ?


edit: If a mod is around could they fix "Sean " and make it "Season" please.