Back when Tiger Woods changed caddies, Steve Williams went ballistic. From Williams' comments, you would have thought that it had been Williams, and not Tiger, who had hit all of those magnificent golf shots on the way to winning the thirteen (13) major championships that Tiger won while Williams was on his bag.
Now, we consider Williams' "performance" as Adam Scott's caddie during the 2012 British Open.
Before the finish of the Open Championship on Sunday, July 22, Sir Nick Faldo opined on international television that Steve Williams was entitled to signficant credit for Adam Scott's brilliant performance through the holes played to that point ... at least 63 holes a that time, and perhaps a few more. Well ... let's face facts. One of the few things I caddie can really do to improve his player's performance is in the emotional/psychological realm - to help the player do his best in the toughest of pressure situations. And in that realm, today - in the last four holes of the Open Championship, Steve Williams obviously failed Adam Scott miserably, because Scott folded like a cheap suit.
I like Adam Scott. He showed amazing class and integrity in his post-tournament interviews. It is well known that he is universally well thought of among his peers on the PGA and international tours. He is obviously a fine striker of the golf ball. And, he will undoubtedly win one or more major championships some day. But, this post is not about Adam Scott. This post is about Steve Williams - the blow-hard caddie who so pompously and boisterously elevated himself during the conversation about Tiger's having fired him.
The public will never know the real reason that Tiger fired Williams, but it was almost certainly something that Williams said or did in connection with the firestorm that arose from Tiger's infidelity to his wife. Williams bragged about how he had "stood by" Tiger. Apparently his allegiance went only so far.
But, this post isn't about Steve Williams' break-up with Tiger Woods, either. This post is merely to point out that if Steve Williams is to claim credit for Tiger Woods' successes, then he - and Sir Nick Faldo - must accept the fact that Steve Williams is equally responsible for Adam Scott's utter collapse in the last four holes of the 2012 British Open. Whenever Steve Williams publicly accepts his partial responsibility for Scott's collapse, then I will rethink my obviously negative opinion of Williams. But ... I'm not going to hold my breath until Williams accepts his part of the responsibility for Scott's abject failure.
I feel really badly for Adam Scott. He is by any measure a fine and classy young man.
As for Steve Williams - such a crushing loss couldn't happen to a more deserving caddie.
Sunday, July 22, 2012
Saturday, June 9, 2012
If Joe Biden is a REAL patriot ...
If Joe Biden is a real patriot, then he will realize that the 2012 Presidential election is the most important election in his lifetime ... and in the lifetime of anyone born after 1986. If the Republicans get control of the White House ... and get to nominate all of the U. S. Supreme Court justices who are nominated from 1-21-2013 through 1-21-2017 ... it will cast this country back to the Stone Age.
I'm not saying that an Obama-Biden ticket can't win in 2012. But I will say unequivocally that an Obama-Hillary Clinton ticket would be infinitely more likely to win in 2012. If Joe Biden cares more about the future of this country than he cares about himself and his own political legacy, he will tell President Obama that he thinks he [President Obama] would be better served by a different running mate in 2012, and will decline to run on the ticket with President Obama in 2012. That will leave President Obama open to ask Hillary Clinton to run with him in 2012. If she will do so, then that will greatly enhance the probability that a Democratic President will get to nominate the next two or three justices to the U. S. Supreme Court, and it will also greatly enhance the probabillity that a Democrat (Hillary) will be elected President in 2016.
Just MHO, of course.
Best to all.
Lucian
I'm not saying that an Obama-Biden ticket can't win in 2012. But I will say unequivocally that an Obama-Hillary Clinton ticket would be infinitely more likely to win in 2012. If Joe Biden cares more about the future of this country than he cares about himself and his own political legacy, he will tell President Obama that he thinks he [President Obama] would be better served by a different running mate in 2012, and will decline to run on the ticket with President Obama in 2012. That will leave President Obama open to ask Hillary Clinton to run with him in 2012. If she will do so, then that will greatly enhance the probability that a Democratic President will get to nominate the next two or three justices to the U. S. Supreme Court, and it will also greatly enhance the probabillity that a Democrat (Hillary) will be elected President in 2016.
Just MHO, of course.
Best to all.
Lucian
Sunday, April 8, 2012
Unlearned sportswriters (no, wait - that's redundant) ...
My last post, several weeks ago now, pointed out the "work" of a lazy sportswriter who didn't know the difference between Western Kentucky University and Murray State University, both of which regional schools from The Bluegrass had basketball teams competing in the NCAA basketball tournament -- the inimitable "March Madness". Of course, in the ensuing weeks I've read a lot of sportswriters' stories about the tournament. That mass of sportsreading was filled with stupid and inane statements. I would have written back "comments" to those who authored the pieces, but to do so one has to use Facebook or Twitter or one of the other "social media" methodologies in which I refuse to take part. So, I've decided that a part of this blog is going to be my own personal "comments page" about all of the ignorance that appears in the printed word in this great country.
With that said .... I write today about one of Sports Illustrated's most prominent writers on the subject of college basketball -- a guy named Luke Winn -- who wrote a piece that appeared on the SI website on April 8, 2012 about the University of Kentucky's having captured the NCAA National Basketball Championship on April 2, 2012 with a team that included three so-called "one-and-done" freshmen. This year's U.K. team was, of course, it's third team under Coach John Calipari and its third straight team on which one or more of its freshmen (in this year's case, at least two and maybe three of them) will enter the NBA draft and become a professional player after having played only one season of college basketball [each becoming, by definition, a so-called "one-and-done" (hereinafter, "OAD") player].
Now, I'm a huge fan of University of Kentucky athletics in general, and of U.K. basketball in particular, and it is important to point out that Winn's article was not critical of Coach Calipari for the fact that his seven-man rotation on this National Championship team included two or three OADs. The point of the piece was apt -- that Kentucky and Coach Cal have demonstrated that a college basketball program that recruits many OADs and signs a few obvious or potential OADs each year can win a National Championship while turning over a big part of its starting lineup every year. So I'll first compliment Luke Winn for a pretty good article, from the standpoint of the substance of it's general point.
But ... I almost laughed out loud when I read this line in Winn's piece: "What they proved was that the stockpiling-one-and-dones model, once thought to be a folly, can actually work."
Now, Dictionary.com tells us that when used as a verb (as Winn used it) the word "stockpiling" means "accumulating for future use". However, it is the very essence of a one-and-done player that he is not "stockpiled" -- that he is not going to be "for future use". What Winn could have said that would have been a correct usage of the word "stock" and would have made his point would have been: "What they proved was that the stocking-up-on-one-and-dones-every-year model, once thought to be a folly, can actually work." Kentucky did "stock up on" two or three OADs in the summer of 2011 when Coach Cal signed Anthony Davis, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, and Marquis Teague. But the 'Cats won't be "stockpiling" them. Rather, at least two of those and maybe all three of them will not be around for the next season, but will instead be playing in the NBA.
After getting into this blog post, I've realized that it's taken a lot of time and a lot of words to explain what made me laugh out loud about Luke Winn's obvious misuse of the word "stockpile". I may or may not go to this much trouble again for a similar purpose ... but I probably will, because I just can't stand not to write a "comment" about such things !
Maybe most of the foolish sportswriter mistakes about which I write in the future will be easier to describe and/or explain and comment upon. One can only hope.
Best to all, and ... Go, 'Cats !
Lucian
With that said .... I write today about one of Sports Illustrated's most prominent writers on the subject of college basketball -- a guy named Luke Winn -- who wrote a piece that appeared on the SI website on April 8, 2012 about the University of Kentucky's having captured the NCAA National Basketball Championship on April 2, 2012 with a team that included three so-called "one-and-done" freshmen. This year's U.K. team was, of course, it's third team under Coach John Calipari and its third straight team on which one or more of its freshmen (in this year's case, at least two and maybe three of them) will enter the NBA draft and become a professional player after having played only one season of college basketball [each becoming, by definition, a so-called "one-and-done" (hereinafter, "OAD") player].
Now, I'm a huge fan of University of Kentucky athletics in general, and of U.K. basketball in particular, and it is important to point out that Winn's article was not critical of Coach Calipari for the fact that his seven-man rotation on this National Championship team included two or three OADs. The point of the piece was apt -- that Kentucky and Coach Cal have demonstrated that a college basketball program that recruits many OADs and signs a few obvious or potential OADs each year can win a National Championship while turning over a big part of its starting lineup every year. So I'll first compliment Luke Winn for a pretty good article, from the standpoint of the substance of it's general point.
But ... I almost laughed out loud when I read this line in Winn's piece: "What they proved was that the stockpiling-one-and-dones model, once thought to be a folly, can actually work."
Now, Dictionary.com tells us that when used as a verb (as Winn used it) the word "stockpiling" means "accumulating for future use". However, it is the very essence of a one-and-done player that he is not "stockpiled" -- that he is not going to be "for future use". What Winn could have said that would have been a correct usage of the word "stock" and would have made his point would have been: "What they proved was that the stocking-up-on-one-and-dones-every-year model, once thought to be a folly, can actually work." Kentucky did "stock up on" two or three OADs in the summer of 2011 when Coach Cal signed Anthony Davis, Michael Kidd-Gilchrist, and Marquis Teague. But the 'Cats won't be "stockpiling" them. Rather, at least two of those and maybe all three of them will not be around for the next season, but will instead be playing in the NBA.
After getting into this blog post, I've realized that it's taken a lot of time and a lot of words to explain what made me laugh out loud about Luke Winn's obvious misuse of the word "stockpile". I may or may not go to this much trouble again for a similar purpose ... but I probably will, because I just can't stand not to write a "comment" about such things !
Maybe most of the foolish sportswriter mistakes about which I write in the future will be easier to describe and/or explain and comment upon. One can only hope.
Best to all, and ... Go, 'Cats !
Lucian
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Another pet peeve -- fundamentally uninformed sportswriters ...
I guess y'all never thought that we would be talking about sports on this blog, but ... here we are at the beginning of March Madness, 2012, and ... here we are talking about sports -- particularly, about college basketball, and more particularly about the vast majority of poorly educated and only semi-literate group of people who spend virtually no time researching the background for a piece, and then write about an event for national publication (i.e., "sportswriters").
Let me say at the outset that the only sports commentator whom I consider to be a truly well-educated and well-spoken individual is Jay Bilas. However, I want to hasten to add that I have no qualms with Greg Anthony. He is certainly well-spoken, and he gives the on-air impression of being well-educated -- not a characteristic most would expect from someone who went to UNLV. There are other well-spoken sportswriters and sports commentators who give the appearance of having meaningfully looked into the subjects about which they speak -- Clark Kellogg and Hubert Davis come to mind -- but they are by far the minority. There are LOTS of sportswriters on the other end of the spectrum. My grandmother used to tell me: "If you can't say something nice about someone, just don't say anything about him at all." Ergo ... no further comments here - at least not by name - about "the other end of the spectrum".
Now ... what has brought on this datribe about this subject, you ask. It's so minor I'm almost embarrassed myself to bring it up, but ... since I attended Western Kentucky University myself, and since I spent 55 years living in southern Kentucky, the statement that is the subject of this screed just aggravated the hell out of me.
Anybody who watches college basketball knows that on Tuesday night Western Kentucky University came from 16 points behind with fewer than 6 minutes to play to beat Mississippi Valley State by one point. The point of this post arose in the AP's "recap" of that game. After pointing out that WKU will play the University of Kentucky on Thursday night, the AP writer wrote: "A smaller school from a corner of the commonwealth became the star of the First Four." Of course, the problem is that Western Kentucky University does not lie in "a corner of the Commonwealth". Rather, WKU has been in Bowling Green, Kentucky for over 100 years. Bowling Green is about 22 miles from the Kentucky-Tennessee state line, right on I-65, which runs, inter alia, from Louisville, KY to Nashville, TN. It is 175 miles from Bowling Green to Hickman, KY, which is the westernmost county seat in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. On the other hand, it is 207 miles from Bowling Green to Middlesboro, KY, which is the easternmost county seat of a county that borders Tennessee. The point is that Bowling Green, KY -- home of Western Kentucky University -- is actually located virtually in the middle of Kentucky, from east to west. The reference to "a smaller school from a corner of the commonwealth" would be apt if it were a reference to Murray State University, which is only 52 miles from Hickman, KY, but is 330 miles from Middlesboro, KY.
Now, in the whole scheme of things, does this matter. Probably not. But it's a classic example of a lazy sportswriter presuming that because the name of the school is WESTERN Kentucky University the school must be in the western "corner of the commonwealth". It's a classic example of a lazy sportswriter doing a half-assed job for a full salary. It's people like this, who consistently produce an inferior product with no diminution in their earnings, who are much of what is wrong with our country today. If no one ever calls them out over it, sorry sportswriting in particular, and the state of the country in general, will only get worse.
Best to all.
Lucian
Let me say at the outset that the only sports commentator whom I consider to be a truly well-educated and well-spoken individual is Jay Bilas. However, I want to hasten to add that I have no qualms with Greg Anthony. He is certainly well-spoken, and he gives the on-air impression of being well-educated -- not a characteristic most would expect from someone who went to UNLV. There are other well-spoken sportswriters and sports commentators who give the appearance of having meaningfully looked into the subjects about which they speak -- Clark Kellogg and Hubert Davis come to mind -- but they are by far the minority. There are LOTS of sportswriters on the other end of the spectrum. My grandmother used to tell me: "If you can't say something nice about someone, just don't say anything about him at all." Ergo ... no further comments here - at least not by name - about "the other end of the spectrum".
Now ... what has brought on this datribe about this subject, you ask. It's so minor I'm almost embarrassed myself to bring it up, but ... since I attended Western Kentucky University myself, and since I spent 55 years living in southern Kentucky, the statement that is the subject of this screed just aggravated the hell out of me.
Anybody who watches college basketball knows that on Tuesday night Western Kentucky University came from 16 points behind with fewer than 6 minutes to play to beat Mississippi Valley State by one point. The point of this post arose in the AP's "recap" of that game. After pointing out that WKU will play the University of Kentucky on Thursday night, the AP writer wrote: "A smaller school from a corner of the commonwealth became the star of the First Four." Of course, the problem is that Western Kentucky University does not lie in "a corner of the Commonwealth". Rather, WKU has been in Bowling Green, Kentucky for over 100 years. Bowling Green is about 22 miles from the Kentucky-Tennessee state line, right on I-65, which runs, inter alia, from Louisville, KY to Nashville, TN. It is 175 miles from Bowling Green to Hickman, KY, which is the westernmost county seat in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. On the other hand, it is 207 miles from Bowling Green to Middlesboro, KY, which is the easternmost county seat of a county that borders Tennessee. The point is that Bowling Green, KY -- home of Western Kentucky University -- is actually located virtually in the middle of Kentucky, from east to west. The reference to "a smaller school from a corner of the commonwealth" would be apt if it were a reference to Murray State University, which is only 52 miles from Hickman, KY, but is 330 miles from Middlesboro, KY.
Now, in the whole scheme of things, does this matter. Probably not. But it's a classic example of a lazy sportswriter presuming that because the name of the school is WESTERN Kentucky University the school must be in the western "corner of the commonwealth". It's a classic example of a lazy sportswriter doing a half-assed job for a full salary. It's people like this, who consistently produce an inferior product with no diminution in their earnings, who are much of what is wrong with our country today. If no one ever calls them out over it, sorry sportswriting in particular, and the state of the country in general, will only get worse.
Best to all.
Lucian
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)