[This is the final part of my three-part Stronghold Replay post (part one and part two) which is a more in-depth look at Stronghold and is a follow-up to my initial review.]

HEROES
The defender has two heroes who enhance the troops at a wall.  These are very useful, especially as they can not be killed.  One can increase the strength of the units on a wall, and the other adds some strength and can kill an invader unit before the assault.  Of course, both of these special effects cost hourglasses, but can make a big difference.

FLIPPING THE PHASE CARDS
The reverse side of the phase cards works really well.  At the start of a turn, the invader can flip any of their phase cards over to use the options on the back which are different to the front. For example, rather than build siege weapons, the invader can draw two cards for one siege weapon’s shot.  However, once turned over, they can not be turned back again so it’s a one-way process. 

When reading the rules, this seems okay but it becomes clear that they are actually a really nice game mechanic as the game progresses.  The reason for this is that some phase cards become much less useful over time, i.e. if you’ve built all the equipment allowed.  If these cards remained unchanged they would not be used in the later game.  So, this flipping keeps the 6 different phases alive, rather than dwindling down to just 2 or 3 useful ones.

GLORY
Winning the game is not just about breaking into the stronghold.  Breeching the walls and entering the castle ends the game but the winner is decided on glory points.  The invader starts with 10 points and gives one to the defender each round.  So, for the invader, it is a race against time as the longer the defender holds out, the more glory they will get.  The invader earns 3 points if they break into the stronghold and can earn some extra points for other actions such as having 4 trolls on one wall section, sacrificing 12 goblins in rituals and a couple of others.  The defender is different as they start with 4 glory points and can give them up to get one-off benefits such as gaining a few more hourglasses (because they stall for time with shameful negotiations) or gain a couple of extra troops (by releasing their prisoners).

I would like to see the same system used to select phase cards for the extra glory points.  This would more variety to the scoring system so the objectives could be a bit different each time.  The ones that are there are good, but a bit more choice would be nice.  (I can imagine having secret objectives being very cool to so you would need to try and work out what your opponent might be up to.)

So far, it seems like a hard game for the invader to win and they can end up be fighting a battle that is already lost.  However, I think the game is more balanced than I have experienced due to a few rule errors we made and also learning what works well in combination.

LONGEVITY & EXPANSION
There is a lot of replayability in Stronghold due to the set-up of the phases.  The one thing that could have given the game even more variety/longevity is if the board was double-sided and the rear had a different stronghold on it with a different configurement of walls, ramparts and paths.  Maybe even a small stronghold for a short game.  No new actions need be created for this – so the invader and defender would have the same options – just a different layout.  I’d love to have the option of a ‘quick’ game.

Of course, expansions could be released with new stronghold layouts.  (These could include new actions for invader and defender but could still work well purely by offering a different layout.)  I still want to see a Minas Tirith Stronghold… please.

I’m sure that new actions/options could be released with some more phase cards to match them.  Also, I mentioned that I’d love to see some more options for glory points too.  Plus, new heroes for the defender, heroes for the invader, and more.  But these things aren’t needed yet as Stronghold already has a lot of variety to offer.

DOWNSIDES
I only have one main complaint about Stronghold which is that it’s a shame that the rules are not very clear in a lot of places and the diagrams in some examples do not match the text descriptions too which make it even more confusing.  However, there are lots of questions with answers on the forums so it is possible to work it out.  I found it took a play and a half to finally have them all sorted.

There is one other downside (but this is more my fault) which is that this is an epic game so it takes an epic amount of time to play it.  I don’t expect games to deliver an epic feel without them being deep and/or long – just like I don’t expect a 30 minute film to deliver a rich story, plot twists and character development.  If I was younger, myself and my friends would have more time on my hands and could play Stronghold  more often.  As it is, it is a game we will not to play as often as we would like (like War of the Ring, Arkham Horror, Twilight Struggle, and other such epics).  So, this isn’t really the game’s fault.

FINALLY
One last note I’d like to mention is that I think Stronghold executed a great pre-release campaign.  The designer posted 10 designer diary posts on BoardGameNews which really delved inside the design of the game and I think really raised awareness and interest with perfect timing for Spiel 09.

Well, that’s it for my three-part Stronghold replay thoughts.  Tomorrow, I’ll be back to reviewing other games as usual.

James.

So I have already finished the posting for the download links for the song of SHINee.
I planned on putting up the straming sites next for the songs.

I’m a Imeem user so expect the site to be Imeem. If anyone wants me to upload the mp3’s I have to other music sites then pls. do tell me. It’s always a pleasur to join other music sites.

So here are the links for those who just want to listen to the songs or for those who want to listen before downloading the songs.

STREAMING: (Imeem)– SHINee [샤이니] – Stand by Me
– SHINee [샤이니] – Real
– SHINee [샤이니] – 줄리엣 (Juliette)
– SHINee [샤이니] – 아.미.고 (A.Mi.Go)
– SHINee [샤이니] – 누난 너무 예뻐 (Replay) (Boom Track)
– SHINee [샤이니] – 산소 같은 너 (Love like Oxygen)
– SHINee [샤이니] – 링딩동 (Ring Ding Dong)
– SHINee [샤이니] – 누난 너무 예뻐 (Replay)
– SHINee [샤이니] – Bodyguard

there you go.!

for those people who also have Imeem accounts add me up! The user who uploaded those songs is also the same user who is posting this post! xD And also, always expect that every song that I have up in my Imeem would have a corresponding download link. Although it’s not posted there, you can always PM me in my Imeem account, or comment on the song, or just look for the DL Link here!

[This is a follow-on from yesterday's Stronghold Replay post (part one) which is a more in-depth look at Stronghold and is a follow-up to my initial review.]

TRAPS AND BRIDGES
Most of the pathways to the castle can have either a trap (placed by the defender and which will kill some specific enemy units if they use the path) or a bridge (placed by the invader and which mean no trap can be placed there).  Once they are placed, they can not be undone and remain there for the game.  These seem relatively small but, once laid, the paths and traps really start to define the battlefield.  Obvious routes that the invaders troops will probably follow start to form and this starts to determine which walls will be the preferred targets.

I thought this was a really nice gameplay mechanic and I would look to lay down traps or bridges earlier in future games.  That way I could control the battlefield a little bit and (as the defender) would try to build wall defences afterwards so that they work in harmony with the traps, or (as the invader) would bring troops onto the board at the best locations.

As with all things in Stronghold, there is a limited amount of traps and bridges (three of each) so no player can completely over run the other.

DEFENDING THE WALLS
One of the key items for the defender is how to lose as few troops as possible especially in the build-up to assaults on the walls.  This is because troops can be trained to be better but no new ones can be created so your forces can only diminish.

Packing a wall with defending troops will give it the best chance of resisting the invading army but troops on walls that are hit by siege weapon fire (and potentially goblin archers) are killed so go out of the game.  Also, the defender may want some marksmen on the walls to pick off some enemies who don’t have cover.  (The invader can use cover to keep their troops safe from marksmen but, like with most things, the invader only has 3 pieces of cover to deploy so can not cover every area.)  So, what’s right balance of troops to have on a wall?  Maybe you should keep them off a wall and only send them in when required?  These are questions to which the answers are only found by playing and depend upon the situation.  I packed my walls with troops to defend because of the threat of enemy forces but it meant I lost a lot of troops to siege weapons (primarily because my opponent sacrificed vast amounts of goblins to get the blood stone enhancement which means catapults can take out troops too).  I would probably hold troops back a bit more next time, but I would prefer to lose a few troops to siege weapons than risk a breech because I left a wall too poorly defended with not enough time to deploy troops to it.

The defender has another decision on the walls too – What to fill turrets with?  Turrets can hold posts (which can remove enemy units on the wall), cannons or marksmen (which can both remove enemy units approaching the walls).  With only a few turrets, the choice can be quite difficult, which makes it an interesting game.

COMBAT
The combat on the walls is diceless – both sides add up the total value of their troops plus any bonuses (like wall sections and heroes).  The difference between the two values is the amount of losing troop strength that will be removed, i.e. 2 points difference could remove 2 white units or 1 green unit, etc).  I like that it doesn’t feel totally random, but it might be nice to have a little bit of randomness to it so that players can not be 100% sure of the outcome.  There is some randomness if the invader uses hidden orders, or if the defender has a post on a neighbouring turret but these are quite small differences.  Maybe that is all that is required, but I did have a thought about the potential addition of a dice that rolls 0 / 0 / 0 / +1 / +1 / +2 and each side adds their result to their total score.  It would just add that extra uncertainty.  Without trying it I can’t tell – I’m sure some people would love it and some would hate it.

The defender has one advantage in that units removed in combat at a wall go to the hospital.  At the end of a round, two units in the hospital will return to duty and (the others are removed).  As an invader, if you’re attacking the walls you want to cause many losses at once so the hospital is overwhelmed which will thin out the defender’s ranks.  (Note that one option the invader may have available is to be able to raise any units that do not survive the hospital as undead and add them to their own forces.  I love the idea of that.)

INVADER ORDERS
The invader can issue orders to invading units at specific walls to give them special effects, such as orcs can blow themselves up to automatically remove wall sections.  These are an interesting item although we found the defender always spent hourglasses to remove the one order that could potentially do the most damage.  As a result, we thought the invader really needed to be attacking on at least two fronts to use orders well because the invader can only remove one order each round.  Orders will be used a lot better in our next games.

End of Part Two.

For more, check out the third and final part of these Stronghold posts where I’ll cover heroes, flipping the phase cards, glory, expansions, and more.

James.

Stronghold is an epic game.  It is filled with relatively simple options and decisions but there are lots of them and no definitive answer as to which will be right or wrong.  The players act and then re-act to one another and there is little (or even no) downtime as play passes back and forth between invader and defender.

Having played Stronghold a couple of times, I thought I would post some further thoughts on the game  (following-up on my initial review.)  I discovered that not only is Stronghold epic but the length of this post was to become similarly epic too.  So, below is the first of a three-part Stronghold replay report.

I should point out that Stronghold has a lot of different game mechanics and I won’t be trying to explain all the rules; however, I will mention some basics as I go.  If you’re interested, the full rules are available for download.

TROOPS
Both sides have troops which are white (strength 1), green (strength 2) or red (strength 3).  For the invader these are goblins, orcs and trolls, and for the defender these are marksmen, soldiers and veterans respectively.  The defender starts with a fixed amount and can train some to be better; whereas, the invader draws 14 (in a two-player game) at random from the bag of 200 units each turn.

It’s at this point you realise that losing troops is all going to be part of Stronghold and giving your units (cubes) names will only make it more painful when you lose them.  This is especially so for the invader as they will discard troops (along with resource cubes) to make equipment like shields, siege engines and bridges as well as lose them in battle.  The defender just needs to lose units at a slow enough rate to give themselves a good chance of winning the game.

HOURGLASSES AND RESOURCES
The core gameplay mechanic involves hourglasses.  Each time the invader performs an action, the defender receives hourglasses which are the currency the defender uses to take actions.  The more the invader does, the more time the defender has to prepare.  The invader can use (discard) better troops to perform actions more quickly so they don’t give the defender as many hourglasses.

In addition to using units (manpower), the invader has brown resource cubes too which are also required to build equipment and siege engines.

SETTING THE PHASES
The first really nice game mechanic that you encounter in Stronghold is the invader’s set-up.  It is at this point that the invader player selects what tools will be available to them during the game.  To do this, the invader draws two cards for most phases and picks one.  These phase cards dictate what tools and options the invader will have in each phase of the game.  Once picked, they do not change.  So, if the player doesn’t pick the battering ram, they will not be able to build a battering ram at any point of the game.  The selection of the phase cards sets the invader’s strategy right there.  With several cards for each phase and each having different mixtures of tools/options on them, each game could be quite different.

I’ve only played with the recommended starting configurement so far (which is a nice inclusion as you have no idea what to pick on your first play) and I look forwards to the various other options, especially the battering ram, in future.  This should really increase variety when playing the game multiple times and longevity is a good thing.

SIEGE WEAPONS
The game usually starts with the build up and preparation of invading forces and they will probably build their support weapons and equipment before launching full troop assaults.  Siege weapons usually get built early on to start harassing the defender.

The way the siege weapon cards work is excellent.  When built, each siege weapon starts with a deck of 7 cards – 5 misses and 2 hits.  Each time it fires, a card is drawn – any hits are put back in the deck but any misses are removed.  This is a great simulation of a weapon finding its range.  Plus, the defender and the invader can both take actions to add extra cards to the deck too.  It does mean quite a bit of shuffling with decks of just a few cards but I like how it works.

The siege weapons the defender has are a bit different as they all use the same 6-card deck containing cards which say what type of enemy is killed, i.e. a goblin, an orc or a goblin, any unit, and one card which is a complete miss.  No cards are ever removed from or added to this deck.

End of Part One.

For more, check out part two and part three of my three-part Stronghold replay thoughts where I’ll cover traps, attacking the walls and trying to defend them, and more.

James.

We Irish are fit to make a middling fist of cynicism. After all, it’s a well fashionable attitude. But at heart we are anything but. Tell us a good myth and we will buy it, hook, line and most probably sinker. We believe in the dream. Whether it be the American Dream, the Roman Church Dream, the Celtic Tiger Dream or the Good Intentions of Fianna Fail Dream. Now that the dust has begun to settle slightly on the Main de Dieu affair, what lessons are we to take from the sorry tale of Ireland’s unfair departure from the World Cup?

For a start, let’s agree that the let’s-get-a-grip people have a point. It is not the end of the world that we missed out on qualifying for the World Cup. Yes, it cost us a lot of money. Yes, it was unfair. But there are so many more serious issues facing us; floods, global warming, the financial crisis, list them yourself. But football, as has been observed before, is a metaphor for life. Football makes us feel good. Football in the 1980’s was one of the absurd things that gave us a previously lacking belief in ourselves, that took us out of the post colonial doldrums. It has sometimes been said that Jack Charlton and – for entirely different reasons – Mary Robinson started the Celtic Tiger. And whatever about these big brush strokes one thing is sure. A strange tinge of regret will linger in Irish hearts as we watch Henry, Gallas and friends go about their business in South Africa 2010. Our minds will inevitably drift back to a November evening in 2009.

Remember? First off, we sang. The 5000 or so of us who had forked out and travelled to the match sang their lungs out for Amhrain na bFiann, but they sang Les Marseillaise nearly as lustily, shoulder to shoulder with our hosts. They bought into the occasion, into the pageant, into the competition with our traditional belief, commitment and humour. The rest of us sang along mentally with the TV. The country is small, and many of the Irish soccer fans would also have watched rugby matches at the Stade de France. We like the French. We knew a lot of their players, some in particular from their high profile gigs in England. The feeling in our hearts was more of hope than of conviction, being 1 – 0 down from the first leg. But we do the role of underdog well. When no one expects much from us, we are always good.

The world of the top flight professional footballer is one far removed from the world inhabited by most football fans. Millions of words have been written about the fishbowl of celebrity. But, like a lot of things, you probably need to be there to really understand what being a famous footballer is all about. We know, but don’t understand their world, a world in which they (generally) start out young, leave (an often modest) home, never grow up and dedicate huge work to their skills and fitness. They pretty well sacrifice everything to become one of the few, the very few who graduate, get through the eye of the needle and fulfil their dreams of fame and riches.

It might be useful to contemplate here some of the threads that bind the fans and these remote football stars together. One such is obvious. It is memory. Most footballers were once fans themselves. They stood on the terraces and dreamed. Another link are the referees, the middle-aged lads who puff and huff through the game blowing (or not blowing) whistles and raising flags. Most of these are part time (although FIFA are said to favour more professional referees), and they are modestly paid, especially in comparison to the celebrities whose play they regulate. Theirs is the epitome of a thankless job. Sometimes all that opposing fans agree on are the failures of the ref and his team.

Another link between fans and players are the managers. However high-flying and however famous a manager, he dare not incur the displeasure of the fans. Losing the dressing room is one thing; but losing the terrace is even more threatening for the career of a gaffer.

At some stage in the Stade de France on 18 November, it dawned on Thierry Henry that he was not playing in a superleague, Spanish or English or French. An international, especially this kind of international, is a different beast. Here you play with the honour of your country at stake. And to most people, even today, that means something. The Irish fans are not cynics; but neither are the French. They too, sang. They too, believed. And from their reaction in various blogs, in overwhelming votes on the Internet, in their calls for the match to be replayed, it is obvious that a sporting occasion, not a win-at-all-costs one was what they thought they were attending. Fans across the globe, English fans, Hungarian fans, Japanese fans, all voiced their outrage and disquiet at the injustice. These are not cynics either. A small minority, of course, insisted on a display of world-weary cynicism. But, as a number of people pointed out, a large proportion of the consumers of football and its associated merchandise are children. And they are not cynical either.

It was informative to listen to a series of professional footballers deliver their verdicts on the subject of the Henry foul that got away. Because of the sacrifices they have made, perhaps because they have had to re-invent super-flexible versions of themselves to get through the eye of the needle, the top players and ex-players have become as cynical as soldiers. Be it Roy Keane or Mick McCarthy. Be it Ronnie Whelan or David Beckham. And this sorry affair gives us a glimpse behind the clichés of football at the real people who perform week in week out for the clubs. You can detect the egos, the arrogance of course. But you can also detect self doubt, self loathing, even in the words of Roy Keane. He seems to be forever fighting a shadow Roy Keane who forgot to bring the footballs to Saipan or who is afraid to win, or who might have let the ball hop in the six yard box, once, at the end of a tired game, and lost everything. He had a fantastic playing career, and has entered the hall of fame as one of the true greats of Ireland and of Manchester United. He always seemed to have time on the ball, even in the most crowded midfield. He had authority on that field of dreams. Yet he left his last management job with an air of Hari Kiri about him. Roy needs to give himself a break. And give others a break, too.

Likewise Stephen Ireland, in a totally different way. Ireland just can’t believe he got through the needle’s narrow eye. He with his gawky body and prematurely receding hair. To convince himself, he keeps flaunting absurdly expensive cars, and giving interviews explaining why he’s not coming back to play for his country. He once said (perhaps in jest) that he hates football. He is every inch the star but all his body language betrays is fear. He is afraid of breaking the spell. He is afraid to play for Ireland, because he might be found out. He might not be good enough. You have to think for a second, when you try to name examples of people at the very top who seem to have kept their innocence and personal balance. But, from a distance, we can venture Ryan Giggs, Richard Dunne, Shay Given. Others have had their difficulties and recovered and carried on. It must be a strange place these lads occupy.

Thierry Henry seems basically to be a nice guy. His post match comments regarding his actions and even his apology for his celebration show that he is a man with a conscience and a sense of justice. It is true that his reaction was confused. He played up the goal, then later sat beside Richard Dunne on the pitch and tried to engage him in discussion. Not because he is a cynic, but because he knew by then that he was a loser, too. He had heard the singing and remembered the faces of the Irish fans. Later he saw the tears of the Irish. The uproar and genuine anger across the world did hurt him. There is no doubt about that. He was the captain in a very real sense of the French team. It is he, reports claim, rather than the vague Domenech, who really leads – and perhaps even picks – the French side. But once the storm broke Henri found himself isolated and abandoned, by the French FA, and – by the tone of his remarks – perhaps even by his playing colleagues. Everyone had to wait to see if he might have to be sacrificed. At this level, the players may be cynical. But the blazer brigade, made up of ex players and wannabe players are cynical squared. Cynical magnified to grotesque levels.

Korea, the World Cup host nation, were cheated into the closing stages of the World Cup finals in 2002, at the expense of Italy. Byron Moreno, the referee of the match, wrongly disallowed a perfectly good Italian goal by Tommasi, and sent off an Italian player unjustly. The Italian coach at the time was one Giovanni Trappatoni. Moreno was later banned for 20 matches in his native Ecuador for playing excessive (13 minutes, after 6 had been signalled) extra time, thereby affecting the results of a match between Liga Deportiva Universitaria de Quito and Barcelona Sporting Club.

The seeding made half way through the 2009 World Cup qualifying competition was clearly designed to affect the results. In the days before the match, the French newspaper Le Figaro wrote that the seeding of the playoff draw had been deliberately loaded in favour of the ‘big’ teams; and they questioned the influence of Adidas, sponsors of the French team. Right from the start, the preference of the world governing body were clear. This put – even if no pressure other than this was exerted – a terrible strain on one of the key links between the fans and the never-never land of top level football. The referee.

On the night of the match the Swedish official Hansson decided to employ a conventional ‘left handed’ diagonal system of control to monitor and regulate play. This system basically breaks the pitch into four quadrants. At the time when the French got their ‘goal’, the first two quadrants were in the Irish half (Q1 was on Shay Givens right) and the other two were in the French half. The ref was diagonally patrolling from quadrant four to quadrant one, leaving his first assistant, Wittberg, quadrant 3 in the French half and a guy called Frederik Nilsson, the second assistant, quadrant 2 along the left side of the Irish touchline. From the endless replays, Nilsson seemed to be the only one with a clear view of the incident. It was his direct responsibility to spot that two French players were offside as the ball came in. He was standing in the correct position, directly in line with the last defender. Inexplicably, though, he missed both the handball and the offside. Nilsson, unlike Hansson, is not a full time ref. He is down on the FIFA site as a ‘foreman’.

When the Irish players protested, referee Martin Hansson made a gesture as if the ball was striking his chest and the side of his body. His message was; I saw it (or he saw it), it was a good goal, you are wrong to protest. He even booked Damien Duff for over-zealous complaints. Of course video evidence seconds later showed that it was the ref that was wrong. Blatantly wrong. Did he consult with his linesman via his audio link? Presumably. There have been incidents where the officials have ‘unofficially’ used the television replay to make a judgement.  [I have since been told by a Frenchman that they don't show the slow-mo in the Stade de France]. And in the minutes leading up to that replay, somehow Hansson got a completely wrong impression of what happened. Not no impression, mark you, but the WRONG one.

Anyway, Hansson made his decision, the game re-started, and that was that. The Irish played on. In fairness to him, Nilsson had – rightly – flagged an Italian ‘goal’ by Sidney Govou as offside in the 111th minute. The referee also denied Nicholas Anelka a penalty claim when the Frenchman dived. In general, fans agreed, the Swedish officials had a good game, until the lapse in the first half of extra time.

After the world wide post-match inquest began, the focus shifted away from Henry and the Swedish referees and on to the world body and its officials. FIFA were already in their bunker. A bland version of the match was described on their website, omitting for the first 24 hours any mention of the handball. They cited the rules of the game in their statement responding to the FAI call for a replay. The referee’s decision is final, they said, pointing to the rule book. Only – the referee’s decision is not final, it turns out. Uzbekistan and Bahrain had a game replayed under the stewardship of FIFA during the 2006 qualifiers, on the basis of a referee’s mistake.

And here, I would suggest, lies the greatest danger for Sepp Blatter and the suits in FIFA. As long as The Threads That Bind the true fans to the strange world of the booted gladiators hold, their position (and those of sponsors, etc.) is safe. But break that spell, and get half a million of them baying for blood and you can forget the deals. You can forget the massive edifice that is world football. Because, like the banking system, the entire thing works on the basis of confidence. World wrestling is fun, but no one believes it is real. If the paying football punters were to become as cynical as the players, not to mention the officers of the governing bodies, the world game would not last a wet week. Stay un-cynical, Ireland fans, and true fans everywhere. Believe, for as long as you can.

先日18日に行われた2010年ワールドカップ（Ｗ杯）の欧州予選プレーオフ、フランス対アイルランドの第2戦で、フランスが延長戦の末、ティエリ・アンリのハンドで得たゴールで1−1の引き分け、ワールドカップ行きのチケットを手に入れた件で、「正義感の強い」イギリスメディアは連日大騒ぎだ。スポーツ欄だけではなく、ニュース欄でも大きく取り上げている。このハンドはビデオで見ても明らかにハンドなのに、レフェリーが見逃した。アイルランドサッカー協会（IFA）は国際サッカー連盟（FIFA）に抗議、再試合を申請したが、FIFAは却下、フランスサッカー連盟（FFF）も拒否した。全て予想された結果だ。アイルランドも勝ち目なしと、早々に諦めたようだ。試合の後、インタビューを受けたフランス人ジャーナリストは、ワールドカップでは大きなお金が動くし経済効果も大きいので、FFFは絶対再試合を受け入れないと断言していた。その通りだった。これが逆の立場だったら、どうなっていただろうと思う。

当のアンリはハンドは認めてるけど、審判の責任だからと謝ってないし、「再試合がフェア」と言ってるけど、それもFIFAが再試合拒否の裁定を出してからだ。代表辞退も考えたらしいけど、結局辞めないし。自分のイメージ挽回のために、口先だけで適当に言い逃れて、ほとぼりが冷めるのを待ってるんだろう。

八百長とまでは言わないけれど、都合のいい結果を正そうとしないその後のFIFAの対応が、やはりスポーツも所詮ビジネス、影響力のあるサッカー強国に有利な世界なのねと思わせる一件だ。The Sunday TImesで、興味深い「陰謀説」記事を見つけた。元フランス代表のミシェル・プラティニ欧州サッカー連盟の会長の手引きによって、今回のプレーオフは、強国に有利になるように、くじ引きではなく、世界ランキングの高い国と弱い国が当たるシード方式を採用したと言われている。強国に有利になるようにしているのには、高額のテレビ契約料やスポンサーの思惑も絡んでいるのかもしれない。また、プラティニ会長もFIFAのジョセフ・ゼップ・ブラッター会長も、ビデオ判定導入には何故か消極的だ。確かに、偶然にしては、なんだかうさんくさい。

フランスとイギリスのメディアの論調の違いも面白い。フランスは自国チームのふがいなさを酷評しつつも、FIFAやFFFの決定には異議はないようだ。かたやイギリスメディアは、「Cheat（いかさま）」「Fallen Idol（堕ちたアイドル）」等と手厳しい。これはアングロサクソンとラテンの価値観の違いか。ルールや公正さを重視するアングロサクソンに比べ、ラテン人は自分が良ければ全て良し、「運も実力のうち」「神様の思し召し」「ラッキー♪」って感じだろう。

またイングランド人には、この1件が、1986年ワールドカップ準々決勝で、マラドーナの「神の手」ゴールで、イングランドがアルゼンチンに敗れた悪夢を思い起こさせる。自国のことでないのに今回の大騒ぎは、このことも多いに関係してるのだと思う。

フランスは、対戦相手が多少なりとも自制心のあるアイルランドで良かったと胸を撫で下ろしてるだろう。これがエジプトやアルジェリアが相手だと大変なことになっていたかもしれない。サッカーの世界での権力のなさでワールドカップ行きを逃した、アイルランドチームが本当に気の毒だ。

There has been a huge media frenzy in UK about the Thierry Henry’s ‘Hand Of God’ during Ireland vs France World Cup 2010 play-off on November 18th and it’s aftermath: since France won a ticket to South Africa with 1-1, thanks to Henry’s ‘cheating’ act. UK media with “strong sense of mission to pursue justice” have been putting up big articles about  this incident, not only in sports sections but also in general sections, everyday since then. You can see clearly that it was handball, but the referee missed to see this crucial foul or chance to correct the mistake. Irish Football Association (IFA) demanded a rematch, but FIFA and the French Football Federation (FFF) said ‘NO’ – but it is all expected. IFA seems to give up already because they know that it is a fight they will never win. After the game, a French journalist who was interviewed by BBC said that FFF would never accept a replay, because big money and industries involved and economic effect would be enormous. He was right. But what it would happen, if France lost with Irish footballer’s  handball – would FIFA give the same judgement?

Henry admitted his handball but never say sorry. He said that replay would be fair for Ireland but AFTER FIFA and FFF refused a rematch. It was reported that he considered quitting “Les Bleus” but he decided to stay anyway – all talks doesn’t convince me if he is truly remorseful, but I believe he is saying whatever to repair his image and just waiting for everyone to forget about his ‘mistake’

I don’t call it setup, but FIFA and FFF’s reluctance  to correct their convenient result is truly disappointing, and now I strengthen my belief that soccer is just another business, and always a stronger with bigger political power wins – fair play is a mere myth for important games like this. I read an interesting article by the Sunday Times “Conspiracy or coque up?” The play-offs were seeded on the basis of world rankings in favour of the bigger nations, and it was reported that the proposal to introduce seeding had come from UEFA (president is former French player Michel Platini). Why? Could it be related to the advance long-term television contracts, or the influence by one of a big sponsor which will possibly gain huge profit if France win? For some reason, Platini and FIFA president Sepp Blatter are said to be reluctant to introduce video technology, which can bring fairer judgement – why? Maybe a coincidence, but all these things sound pretty dubious.

Also it is very interesting to see the different stances between British and French media. Though French media criticizes their team done terrible in the game but they don’t attack the FIFA and the FFF of their judgement. On the other hand, British media is harsh on Henry as ‘cheat’ or “fallen idol,’ as well as on the FIFA. Probably this is due to the difference in Anglo-Saxons and Latins mentality: in compare to Anglo-Saxons’ values in fairness and justice, Latins would just think, “luck is also a part of his ability” “miracle” “godsend” – they would never criticize someone who give them a jackpot, even though from a devil.

In addition, for English, this incident reminds them of the nightmarish Hand of God goal, scored by footballer Diego Maradona during the 1986 FIFA World Cup quarter final Argentina vs England – probably it explains why British media is so obsessed with this incident which is not related to their own team.

French must be happy that the opponent was Ireland – if it was Egypt or Algeria, it would be a huge riot!

I am extremely sorry for Ireland who lost a chance to go to World Cup, due to a lack of political power in football world, rather than their lack of ability. Shame on Henry, shame on France, and shame on FIFA!

Iyaz is currently sitting pretty at number three at in the US chart.  So firstly we had “Kiss me thru the phone” from Soulja boy, then we had just recently “Whatcha say” by Jason Derulo and now to add the R&B catchy ringtone friendly “tunage” we can add replay. Although lyrically and vocally this song stinks like scooby doo’s fith leg, the melody carries it through.  The typical cliché of the simplicity of the american lifestyle tries to carry this video, but the only thing i’m staring at is the girl in the video…. You know the one in the bikini…. I like!.

Iyaz – Replay — Score 7/10

Tom Novy & Jerry Ropero ft. Abigail Bailey – Touch Me (Original Mix)

Replay – Sean Kingston

major splurge at powells today. hence the added books to my new soul list. found places in powells i’d never seen before. city block of books best idea ever. no regrets on the splurge. ♥♥♥ and it’ll be even better when i don’t have parental eyes examining my finances.

dinner with kristine and marco was lovely. she’s an amazing cook. we had this lasagna-type-but-better-and totally-not-lasagna main dish and homemade blueberry ice cream. their daughter isabella is super cute and lorenzo is precious with his deal making. frankie even offered to be their babysitter. trying to make good impression on my family found out lots of things about them i didn’t know. hopefully we/i can have them over for dinner once i get an apartment to repay them its fun to have family here

frankie’s friends are here this weekend and it looks like portland might really be the new walnut creek, just like frankie’s been saying. his friends are fun. i like hanging out with them, even though they’re crazy sometimes. but they’ve been friends forever and you can totally tell. most of them share similar mannerisms/phrasing/choice of words and they have these amazing stories and they love to tell them/relive them. makes me happy and its nice to see frankie with his friends too. its good all around

apartment hunting is still slow going and frustrating. but frankie’s being positive when i’m not so its rubbing off on me. i just want to find a place to live! sheesh. i don’t want much. but things are still hard to find. hopefully it works out.

yuumm pudding. work tomorrow then 3 days off, girls day with val on wednesday, thanksgiving on thursday!, early work friday and the weekend! woo hoo. seems so short but work will be a tiny bit stressful just ’cause i’m still learning and trying not to make mistakes. it’ll be nice when everything is muscle memory.

had interesting conversation tonight at the old barn. now if i had a blog that people actually read i would ask opinions on this topic. gonna put the question out there anyways: do you think women should see combat in the military? why, why not?

]]> http://satavut.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/replay-amazing-animated-short-film/ Mon, 23 Nov 2009 01:25:18 +0000 satavut http://satavut.wordpress.com/2009/11/23/replay-amazing-animated-short-film/

Submissions are now open for the Aniboom Animation Fox Holiday Challenge. For more information on getting www.aniboom.com more on www.aniboom.com In a ruined world, is the only hope the memories of a past. But be careful not to let your dreams Control Your Mind … This is Replay. Animation by anthonyvoisin www.aniboom.com consequences Aniboom: Facebook: www.facebook.com MySpace – www.myspace.com Twitter – www.twitter.com If you like this animation, do not forget to sign,…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-cFHeoXAw8&hl=en

Friends Link : N95 Mask Shop in USA. Review Before Buying LCD HDTV Big Screen daily big sale

It has been almost a week since Henry “handed” France a very controversial victory in Paris. Sean St Ledger stated that Ireland was “robbed” following their exit from the World Cup finals. The Preston/Boro central defender said in a post-match interview with Sky Sports, “We got robbed; you can tell by the boys’ reaction it hit his hand blatantly. We feel cheated – we were the better team over the two legs, every football fan in the stadium will say we were the better team tonight.”

It’s difficult to take any positives from this soul crushing event but Ireland can hold their heads up high knowing that they were better side in Paris. Robbie Keane had a number of chances but could only slot away one.

From America to Azerbaijan the general consensus is that a replay is imperative in order to reestablish Fifa’s already deplorable reputation. However, we have to be realistic here folks and a replay just isn’t feasible. Ireland manger Giovanni Trapattoni stated that a replay is “impossible” and he is absolutely correct.

There are a few significant reasons why a replay would be a poor call. First if the replay was to be ordered and if the Irish won, no doubt the French FA would order another replay because Fifa had granted a replay for Ireland. So to be fair Fifa would have to order yet another match. Second, Fifa has never ordered a replay before and this could set a dangerous precedent. Because any match that had the slightest hint controversy would have to be replayed. It would just become too cumbersome on the players. Take for example, in the 2006 World Cup when Fabio Grosso’s controversial penalty was awarded against the Australians. Grosso dove and deceived the referee but the judgment still stood and Italy went on to win the World Cup while the socceroos were left fuming. But if Fifa ordered a replay during the finals it would generate just too much controversy then any match at anytime could be replayed. This would disrupt scheduling, TV slots, and the Clubs of the players.

What can Fifa do to ensure that this type of debacle does not happen again? The answer is simple: video replay. Now before you say that football is a continuous game and video will just slow it down and ruin the integrity of game just humor me for a second.

You take two small cameras and drill them into the underside of the crossbar which would be attached to a light at the top of the goal. When the ball crosses the line the light goes off just like in the NHL. If this happens then we would not have horrible disallowed goals (when Roy Carrol dropped the ball a yard inside the goal against Spurs). Second put a camera behind the goal that monitors the byline. So on penalties the Refs can review it before they make a call. The refs stop the game for the penalties and fouls anyway why can’t the fourth official review the play and relay the information to the Ref?

I am not saying that the game would have to be stopped for every little tackle. Just penalty claims and dubious goal decisions (or lack thereof) or anything controversial in the box. Think about that for a second, we could reduce diving, handballs, and other horrible acts that tarnish the games reputation.

That being said a replay is not the answer and with the two country’s politicians getting involved things are only going to get more complicated. Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen met with French President Nicolas Sarkozy at a european summit in Brussels. Sarkozy was sympathetic to the Irish but he was not going to help Ireland in their claim for a replay. Sarkozy stated, “I told Brian Cowen how sorry I was for them. But don’t ask me to substitute myself for the referee, or the French football authorities, or the European football authorities: leave me right where I am.”

The Irish deserve to go to South Africa and the French do not. Ireland played the better football, France cheated their way in. But that being said the horrible officiating let the Irish down (cough, video replay,cough). But Football is cruel mistress is it not?

Patrice Evra has offerered Ireland a replay…..but only on a playstation and said that they “should be erecting a statue” of Thierry Henry in France.

Henry has said yes to a replay, but the FFF have said NO, FIFA have said NO, maybe its time we Irish get over the idea of a replay……

We should have been well on our way to South Africa before Thierry Henry’s hand ball. Doyle, Duff and Keane all should have scored as we wasted chance after chance…so really we only have ourselve to blame…we missed the chances, no-one else.

John Delaney and the FAI have done what every Irish fan would have expected and appealed for a replay to be played, knowing very well how unlikely a replay would be.

If the boot was on the other foot, would we be offering France a replay if it was one of our players who had handled it?? We all know the simple answer is …NO. No way in hell would we offer them a replay, not in any circumstances.

We need to move on, realise we’re not getting a replay and GET OVER IT….

Langfinger was one of my favourite games (initial review) at Spiel 09 – simple, cute, fun and small. 

Further plays reveals that there are definitely tactics to the game.  The placing of your cubes which will determine you actions and their order  offers some interesting decisions and quite a lot of trying to work out what the other players will be up to too.  Mentally crossing your fingers that they won’t take the spot you want adds a nice excitement.

Also, the fencing of items (which is how you convert most goods into points) is really key as it can be a complete bottleneck.  Having lots of hot stolen goods is (literally) pointless if you can not fence them.  In fact, I started to consider which fence my opponents would want to use so I could use that one and make it harder for them to fence too.  If you can’t fence goods (and especially if you just need a few points to reach 20 to end the game), grabbing the chests for instant points (no fence required) is also a good tactic although they aren’t usually worth as much as fenced goods.

Langfinger may be simple but it is elegant.  I’m not sure how much more depth it has but it does have some and doesn’t need much more for the light game that it is.  I’m really looking forwards to playing it with the full 5 players as it will be a really big scramble for the different cards.  The game scales depending upon the number of players and with 5 there aren’t even enough new cards for every player to get 2 new  ones each turn.  It should be very entertaining.

James.

[Played with 2 players and with 3 players]

Irish hearts broken in Paris..Republic of Ireland’s dreams of reaching the 2010 World Cup finals were shattered after they suffered a cruel and controversial 1-1 extra-time draw with France in Paris to lose their play-off on aggregate.

Robbie Keane had erased Les Bleus’ one-goal advantage from the opening meeting in the first half, but William Gallas struck in contentious circumstances in extra-time after Thierry Henry had handled in the build-up to book a place in South Africa.

 What was already a colossal fixture in terms of importance had been given plenty of additional stirring from the first leg, which 1998 world champions France won thanks to Nicolas Anelka’s deflected 72nd minute strike at Croke Park. Ugly scenes involving Ireland’s Keith Andrews and France’s Lassana Diarra after the final whistle had overshadowed the match in Dublin and suggested Giovanni Trapattoni’s visiting team arrived at a packed Stade de France with additional intent. But it was a tense opening as Ireland answered Trapattoni’s calls for ‘cool heads’ and dictated the first half-hour, correcting the weekend’s wastefulness in possession, to be rewarded when captain Keane converted Damien Duff’s 33rd minute cutback. Ireland finished the half with their noses deservedly in front on the night, with Raymond Domenech’s France delivering the sort of turgid display which had been heavily criticised when they crashed out of Euro 2008 at the group stages.

The home side emerged after the interval with more intent, but it was Duff who had the best chance as he charged through and forced Hugo Lloris to demonstrate why he is beginning to carve a reputation as one of Europe’s sharpest goalkeepers. Neither side could find another goal in 90 minutes, but Gallas equalised from close range in the first half of extra-time to sneak a 2-1 aggregate win after France skipper Henry had avoided punishment when clearly controlling a free-kick with his hand. Believe Victory over the course of the tie spared France manager Raymond Domenech further abuse, although when the dust settles, his critics may be far from appeased. Keane had been at pains to insist at Ireland’s pre-match press conference at the Stade de France that the tie was far from over, and while his confidence was commendable, few outside the Irish camp were completely won over by his optimism. But by the time the half-time whistle sounded, the men in green both on and off the pitch were starting to believe.

 Republic keeper Shay Given was a virtual spectator for much of the half, and as the men in front of him grew in confidence, it was the visitors who started to make an impression. Patrice Evra had already had to climb high to prevent Liam Lawrence from connecting with Duff’s 18th minute cross and the Stoke midfielder, once again preferred to Aiden McGeady on the right, was in the thick of the action once again six minutes later. He met Kevin Doyle’s cross at the far post to head the ball down for Keane and only the vigilance of keeper Lloris, who rushed from his line to punch clear before the striker could pounce, spared France. There was panic among the French defence once again with 26 minutes gone when Lawrence crossed from the right and Doyle glanced a header across the face of goal. It was all very encouraging for the Irish, and their prayers were answered 13 minutes before the break. Duff was gifted acres of space on the left to make his way to the goalline before looking up and picking out Keane with the perfect pass. Reaction The striker gleefully side-footed the ball past Lloris and into the bottom corner to set France back on their heels and blow the tie wide open.

Domenech’s side attempted to respond but their reaction was lukewarm, and the home crowd, having booed both their own manager and President Nicolas Sarkozy when their respective images appeared on the stadium’s big screens, repeated the dose as the teams left the pitch at the break. Their mood would have taken a significant turn for the worse had Ireland made the most of a glorious opportunity within two minutes of the restart. Trapattoni and his players had spoken repeatedly about France’s perceived weakness from set-pieces in the run-up to the tie, and they had been disappointed not to exploit it at Croke Park on Saturday. But they very nearly did just that when Lawrence curled a 47th-minute free-kick to the far post where the unmarked O’Shea, perhaps astonished to be given so much time and space, controlled on his chest only to volley high over.

The French response improved, and Given was called upon to make his first real save with 54 minutes gone, but Anelka’s long-range effort never troubled him. As the home side pushed men forward, they became increasingly vulnerable, and Trapattoni’s troops were presented with a gilt-edged opening with 61 minutes gone. Lawrence’s defence-splitting pass put Duff in on goal, but the winger was denied by the impressive Lloris as he pulled off yet another vital stop. Anelka glanced a header wide at one end and Keane rounded Lloris but could not get in a shot at the other as the game became increasingly frantic. Given had to claw away an Anelka cross deep into injury time, but Ireland more than deserved their extra 30 minutes. However, Ireland’s luck deserted them 13 minutes into extra-time when Henry handled Florent Malouda’s delivery before crossing for Gallas to score

To FIFA and all those in the soccer community against giving replay a chance I say, “What’s Up With That?”

So many classic encounters have ended with spectacular winning goals which decide the fate of clubs and nations.  These are often the most exciting plays for any soccer fan to witness, as well as the most crushing.  Still nothing is less exciting or more devastating than when one of these goals is scored by breaking the rules.

Tierry Henry’s goal in extra time of the Ireland-France World Cup Qualifier is one such goal.  Let me say right off that angry as I was at the call, I hold no grudge to Henry for handling the ball onto his foot to make a cross leading to a goal.  He is a professional athlete.  His job is to win, and when playing for one’s country it is one’s duty to win.  While what he did was against the rules, it was a heat of the moment natural reaction to accomplish his goal.

Still, it must be addressed that it seems that controversial goals are on the rise globally, especially in international matches when pride and not money is on the line.  Many of these goals have huge consequences, and given their importance, it should become common practice to have instant replay of goals in soccer.

When Ireland asked that the match be replayed, an idea that Henry agreed would be only fair, FIFA refused saying that they are defending the referee’s decision ‘til the end.  Not the decision he made, because clearly that was wrong, but the fact that he had made the decision.  FIFA seems to think that reviewing controversial goals would undermine the authority of the referees and the game, yet they talk furiously about the importance of fair play.

To FIFA I say something that I would not usually say to a soccer organization:  look at the USA.  Not USA soccer, but other American sports that currently employ instant replay.  First look at baseball.  The use of replay for determining homeruns is as fair as anything could ever be.  Even they don’t use it enough though, and nothing undermines the authority of baseball’s umpires more than all the blown calls in the League Championship Series this season.

Now look at American football.  The use of replay has made the game the most fair-play oriented game in history.  The fact that the officials can go to the booth, look at a play, and admit they made a mistake not only helps keep the game fair, but it humanizes the officials for the fans.  It shows people that the referees really are out there to do the best job they can.

With people like Sir Alex Ferguson constantly bashing referees for deciding against his team, now more than ever is the time for soccer to seriously consider the question of instant replay.  Clearly none of the officials saw Henry’s handball, and with all the mess inside the penalty box who can blame them?  Not to mention that soccer more so than any other sport constantly sees players appealing (wrongly) to the ref for calls instead of playing the game.

Replay in soccer would still give the referees supreme pitch authority.  Again I refer to American football.  If a player steps out of bounds before scoring a touchdown but the referee couldn’t tell on the field, it can be proved by replay.  However, you cannot challenge calls like holding which are subject to the discretion of the official, and can have just as big of an impact on a game as a fumble overturned by replay.  I

Soccer could do the same.  They should implement a system where goals are automatically reviewed in a booth upstairs before play resumes.  Most cases in soccer could be settled before the celebration is over.  All you have to do is limit the use of reply.  You say that it can only be used to deny goals in case of offside and handball, because it is usually one of these that creates the controversy.

This would clearly be an imperfect system.  A non-call can be just as important, especially on handballs in the box.  This then brings the question of reviewing all calls and appeals for handball, and this would be an issue to be discussed elsewhere.  FIFA had never had trouble making strictly defined rules, and they shouldn’t now.  You tell the teams that goals will be reviewed for those two things, offside and handball,  and that there is a set time limit for review.  All other power still resides in the hands of the referees.

Is it a perfectly fair system?  No, it favors the defending team, but it is much more fair and will give much more integrity to the game than the current system of not fixing something that is broke.

So many classic encounters have ended with spectacular winning goals which decide the fate of clubs and nations.  These are often the most exciting plays for any soccer fan to witness, as well as the most crushing.  Still nothing is less exciting or more devastating than when one of these goals is scored by breaking the rules.

Tierry Henry’s goal in extra time of the Ireland-France World Cup Qualifier is one such goal.  Let me say right off that angry as I was at the call, I hold no grudge to Henry for handling the ball onto his foot to make a cross leading to a goal.  He is a professional athlete.  His job is to win, and when playing for one’s country it is one’s duty to win.  While what he did was against the rules, it was a heat of the moment natural reaction to accomplish his goal.

Still, it must be addressed that it seems that controversial goals are on the rise globally, especially in international matches when pride and not money is on the line.  Many of these goals have huge consequences, and given their importance, it should become common practice to have instant replay of goals in soccer.

When Ireland asked that the match be replayed, an idea that Henry agreed would be only fair, FIFA refused saying that they are defending the referee’s decision ‘til the end.  Not the decision he made, because clearly that was wrong, but the fact that he had made the decision.  FIFA seems to think that reviewing controversial goals would undermine the authority of the referees and the game, yet they talk furiously about the importance of fair play.

To FIFA I say something that I would not usually say to a soccer organization:  look at the USA.  Not USA soccer, but other American sports that currently employ instant replay.  First look at baseball.  The use of replay for determining homeruns is as fair as anything could ever be.  Even they don’t use it enough though, and nothing undermines the authority of baseball’s umpires more than all the blown calls in the League Championship Series this season.

Now look at American football.  The use of replay has made the game the most fair-play oriented game in history.  The fact that the officials can go to the booth, look at a play, and admit they made a mistake not only helps keep the game fair, but it humanizes the officials for the fans.  It shows people that the referees really are out there to do the best job they can.

With people like Sir Alex Ferguson constantly bashing referees for deciding against his team, now more than ever is the time for soccer to seriously consider the question of instant replay.  Clearly none of the officials saw Henry’s handball, and with all the mess inside the penalty box who can blame them?  Not to mention that soccer more so than any other sport constantly sees players appealing (wrongly) to the ref for calls instead of playing the game.

Replay in soccer would still give the referees supreme pitch authority.  Again I refer to American football.  If a player steps out of bounds before scoring a touchdown but the referee couldn’t tell on the field, it can be proved by replay.  However, you cannot challenge calls like holding which are subject to the discretion of the official, and can have just as big of an impact on a game as a fumble overturned by replay.  I

Soccer could do the same.  They should implement a system where goals are automatically reviewed in a booth upstairs before play resumes.  Most cases in soccer could be settled before the celebration is over.  All you have to do is limit the use of reply.  You say that it can only be used to deny goals in case of offside and handball, because it is usually one of these that creates the controversy.

This would clearly be an imperfect system.  A non-call can be just as important, especially on handballs in the box.  This then brings the question of reviewing all calls and appeals for handball, and this would be an issue to be discussed elsewhere.  FIFA had never had trouble making strictly defined rules, and they shouldn’t now.  You tell the teams that goals will be reviewed for those two things, offside and handball,  and that there is a set time limit for review.  All other power still resides in the hands of the referees.

Is it a perfectly fair system?  No, it favors the defending team, but it is much more fair and will give much more integrity to the game than the current system of not fixing something that is broke.

The French Football Federation turns down the Republic of Ireland’s request for a replay of their controversial World Cup play-off game…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: world cup fixtures. The blog is also related to: soccer goals.

Not often I post something for the pure Hell of it… BUT….This is the best footage I have ever seen of a Shuttle launch. Views from various cameras…. first one, then starting again from another…etc…. fascinating!

NASA STS-127 Endevour Launch – Solid Rocket Booster Cameras – As talked about on SPEEDWAY SQUAD and highlighted by Toren Atkinson.

I’ve watched too much football with God-awful announcers who don’t have the first clue about Broadcasting 101.  It really isn’t that hard.  There are some basics that any blowhard should be able to follow without trying too hard.

- Always show the replay of any nonroutine play (turnover, penalty, injury, blatant noncall, etc.).

- Don’t continue with your stupid BS human interest story while neglecting a nonroutine play.

- Don’t cut away to commerical or taped segment while anything nonroutine is going on.

- Easy on the exaggerations.  The players in your game are rarely “the best in the business.”

- I know networks try to pander to the casual fan (many of whom are of the fairer sex) but take it easy on the cutaways to the emotional wife/girlfriend in the stands.  I can remember an Ohio State-Notre Dame game where the OSU star linebacker’s sister was dating Notre Dame’s stud QB.   So she wore a half-and-half jersey and they must’ve shown her about 45 times.  A couple times is fine, but please, spare me the contrived drama.

- Don’t try to make me feel sorry for any athlete who is getting paid handsomely to PLAY A SPORT for a living.  Boy, I feel real bad that his season has been so rough–spare me.  Try to remember that Joe Sixpack who busts his ass working two jobs for peanuts is watching the game.

- Easy on the war references, especially when we’ve got ACTUAL wars going on.  I know it’s an easy, common reference, but it’s lazy and overdone anyway.

Ultimately, please remember that as an announcer, you’re actually paid to watch and comment on a game–talk about a dream job.  Essentially, you should adopt the hippocratic oath that doctors take, “Do no harm.’”  Try to add something more than what I would hear with my buddies, or any other random guy off the street.   If you can’t do that, then  just shut up.

France striker Thierry Henry says a replay of his side’s World Cup play-off with the Republic would "be the fairest solution"…. From BBC News. Full story

This site may contain information about: football players. The blog is also related to: spanish soccer.